an evaluation through nature and urban layers: the case of...

International Journal of Contemporary Architecture ”The New ARCH“ Vol. 4, No. 1 (2017) ISSN 2198-7688 ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ E. Demirtaş, E. Kishali: “An Evaluation through Nature and Urban Layers: The Case of Izmit”, pp. 1–11 1

DOI: 10.14621/tna.20170101

An Evaluation through Nature and Urban Layers: The Case of Izmit

Emre Demirtaş1, Emre Kishali*2

1Sakarya University, Faculty of Fine Arts, Department of Architecture 54050 Esentepe Kampüsü Serdivan/Sakarya, Turkey; [email protected]

2Kocaeli University, Faculty of Architecture and Design, Department of Architecture 41300 Anıtpark Yerleşkesi Izmit, Turkey; [email protected]

Abstract The cities can be described as dense multi-layered structures by focusing on what produced (built environment) on it (earth) and who produced (human being). They are formed by the cores of socio-cultural accumulation from different historical eras. The base of all the accumulations which is being alive beyond time is defined as nature. Therefore it is clearly seen that the base of thinking over a city vision through a nature is inevitable, because produced ones are constantly changing with respect to time and space, whereas the nature sustains over time and history. On the other hand, while cities have been transforming over the relations of production - consumption due to the neoliberal attacks since early 21st century, the nature is nowadays reduced to physical sizes in various scales. In this paper, negative effects on daily life of city and nature are revealed through the built – produced elements in Izmit since 21st century by focusing the fundamental elements (nature) of city having rich historical layers. Afterwards, the answers are sought for what kind of future is possible for Izmit with its all layers, especially its rich geography. Moreover, Izmit has a reputation of its wetland basin because it is located in the Gulf of Marmara Sea and Sapanca Lake is located on the east of city. In this context, the main objectives of this paper is to show how daily life of city disperse from the nature via philosophical discussions, to highlight the importance of participatory and collective approaches to city life and its stakeholders by looking towards city vision from local authorities view and to point out the essential signs belong to the future for the relations between society and nature of Izmit.

1. Introduction Architecture is a tool for producing built environment in natural habitat as a result it is transforming the existing; therefore, the concept of nature has been the interest of this tool. Nature is the proposal of being fundamentals. When it is considered that human made – artificial ones – are materialised to the extent permitted by the fundamental in the forms of “the truth of life” namely economy or city, it might be stated that the real position of nature has been started to be comprehended via the convergence of intellectual responsibility and these fundamentals. Although the linear quantity of modern human beings and their “reductive, dualist and categorising” views lead to social development, it breaks the human from the roots of discontinuous, unplanned, cyclical, holistic and empirical nature. Today, the average value of social life can educate the earth and the plant; besides, it can see the sea as raw materials of factory; seashores as the reserve spaces of marinas; the wetland as the source of mosquitos and the rivers in the city as the source of stink and dirt. The contemporary social profiles having common value judgements consider that plastic bags and domestic waste water feed the seashores; rivers providing liveability of valleys are the source of fund for hydroelectric centrals. This profile tames the earth as host of numerous lives for the mass production by single dominant specie, human being. Therefore, can we deny that the social perceptions limit the timeless liveability of earth by human life-cycle? In this context, this paper seeks the question whether architecture field competing in the aim of “changing the existing”, accompany the existing ones, nature, which includes the all creatures with or without any exceptions. Because human is not a separate body from the existing; on the contrary, it is intrinsically the extension of existing. It is aimed to trace bio-centric approach grasping the nature as holistic and cyclic way in order to break the devitalising and discriminating effects of dominant paradigm canonizing the every production due to its economic and politic necessities. Considering aforesaid

Keywords: Izmit; Nature; Urban layers; Biocentric approach; Holistic analysis; 21st century

Article history: Received: 25 April 2016 Revised: 07 November 2016 Accepted: 20 February 2017



phenomenon, in this research negative effects upon natural and urban daily life due to the productions since 21st century are revealed via centring the fundamental objects of Izmit. The city is selected due to its rich natural, cultural and historical values and the interventions on architectural – urban productions during 21st century developments. It is figured that it has historical and cultural richness because it witnessed many civilizations, however heavy industrialization, changing consumption behaviours and seismicity is transforming the relation of nature – architecture and future prospective. Therefore the question how prospective future of the city in the context of rich urban, cultural and architectural layers and geography are sustained is sought.

2. Theoretical framework

2.1. Layers and ground “Whenever men pursue their purposes, tilling the effortless earth, forcing the free-flowing wind into their sails, crossing the ever-rolling waves, they cut across a movement which is purposeless and turning within itself“ [1].

As Arendt emphasizes, earth is the sum of infinite flows as earth and sky shaping numerous layers. The forms of life are infinite, too and they appear between earth and sky in micro and macro scales via the flows. Micro flows (particular, molecular, particles) and macro flows (wind, heat etc.) shape the flora and the fauna. For instance, interactions and interplays between water, wind and sun lead to the transformation of rock at seaside into sand particles. Eternal flows of nature transforms the rock into the infinite sand stones. At this point, architecture – the practice of changing the existing – has an effect on freezing these flows. In other words, architecture practice intervenes the endless time of nature via transforming the sand stones with other materials and via chemical disintegration over a frozen form. “For building is not merely a means and a way toward dwelling -to build is in itself already to dwell “[2].

It can be stated that actions through generation of personal habitat is attained by the sheltering needs of human. However, architecture as a discipline of building has been an actual concept. In fact, when the organisation of nature is examined, all creatures have their own habitats in which they sustain the liveability; they have albeit temporary home in these habitats. The existential condition of human via the presence on the earth was opened to phenomenological and ontological discussion in the article of “Building Dwelling Thinking”, attracting to various disciplines, presented by Heidegger for the first time in a conference in 1951 [2]. When etymological investigation is performed, the German

word “bauen” (build) was associated to “bin” (to be); thence, to build is evaluated as existential form of human on the earth. The concept of dwelling can be read as a tool of human survival, reorganizing the relations with surrounding and thus existence. In this research, the concept of dwelling which centres the human can be interpreted as “build a nest/set up a home” via reading live and centralist phase.

Nest is an action which a creature opens a niche in its neighbourhood via given conditions of the habitat. For instance, a beaver re-gathers the trees in the periphery, stones and mud on the river in a different scale in order to build a nest. Therefore, this nest becomes a part of river in the micro scale analysis. In other words, the beaver, nest and river are not separate objects; thence nest compromises building, dwelling and thinking. Primitive humans like birds, bees or moles constituted their habitats via environmental conditions and become a part of the continuity of nature. On the other hand, humans are evolved beyond to another phase of life as opposed to other creatures through the numerous systematic and vital life practices since Palaeolithic era. Kiesler stated that “Current inhabitants” (opposite to primitive human) never do plan and build their homes by themselves; they are entirely exposed to the dictatorship of architecture and civil engineers [3]. In the past, actualising niches in the neighbourhood as spaces via the materials such as bushes, adobe, trees, stones, muds etc. in the human periphery were associated in an organic way; whereas, today, architecture can be apperceived by imposing the its reality towards given environmental conditions; observing the nature as utility tool at the extension of its recognition and exploring the processes leading to construction of not scaled current reinforced concrete. In summary, it is observed that the structure presenting the impacts of these developments as a total strength has been constituted itself by industrialization and became the capitalism of rationalizing through the today’s consumption.

It is also shown that architecture is the founder element of modern society; due to the fact that it enables to produce spaces devoted to the functionality of system. The architecture disciplinary, sustains the orders of capitalism works, reproduces itself continuously but essentially same through providing residential building necessities and urban requirements due to the industrialization. Therefore, the origin of “making” action depends on dwelling turned into producing of spaces via providing the continuity on systematic of control.

The architecture, born as making activity, continuing as production activity today and has been undoubtedly included intense and punctuated historicalness beyond the concept of this research. Nevertheless, the platform



of architecture, producing the spaces via superimposing, gathering, connecting, accumulating of materials, has being slipped to ready – made productions. Baudrillard defines architecture while he is criticising Guggenheim Museum as “All the elements are there from the start. The only thing we need to do is transpose them, permute them, play with them in different ways, and we've made architecture.” [4]. He also added that the motherlands of architecture are cities but economy has higher and stronger influences over the cities rather than other actors, therewithal, architecture serves this phenomenon instead of resisting it [4]. Furthermore, French architect Jean Nouvel claims that architects inevitably produce buildings which do not render the cities as qualified lands and this situation has been enormously increased due the fact that realistic economy proceed in the similar way, feed the construction systematics. These developments including inconsistent bounces in different layers of history tend to standardisation. In this sense, Heidegger claims that world become darker by means of degenerating earth, standardising of human and spreading the simplicity by highlighting the relationship between “being” and the history of earth [5]. Accordingly viewing towards the future of architecture via sensing, realizing the formation and its historical process in upper scale approaches us to the source of problems.

2.2. City, life and objects

“While life is characterized by growth in a structured, functional manner, the necrophilous person loves all that does not grow, all that is mechanical. The necrophilous person is driven by the desire to transform the organic into the organic, to approach life mechanically, as if all living persons were things. (…) Memory, rather than experience; having, rather than being, is what counts. The necrophilous person can relate to an object – a flower or a person – only if he possesses it; hence a threat to his possession is a threat to himself; if he loses possession he loses contact with the world. (…) he loves control, and in the act of controlling he kills life” [6].

As Fromm stated that life is characterized by growth in a structured manner; therefore it is not supervised and defined in advance by its nature. Vitality in life scene continues with the acts of correspondences, disconnections, flows, stimulations, reflexes etc. [7]. On account of comprehending organization unity entirely, it is essential to notice the statements of Maturana and Verala. They claim that “Ongoing structural change occurs in the unity from moment to moment, either as a change triggered by interactions coming from the environment in which it exists or as a result of its internal dynamics”. For instance, a bird cannot be defined as a single bird; in the simplest form it can be perceived with the relations of itself with the wind. Therefore, it can be

figured that the bird is the extension or the form of this natural event. Alternatively, if a beaver example is recalled, it is not the only and the single subject in its habitats; it exists with the extension of the habitat via accompanying the environmental conditions in which it lives [5]. Considering this common concept Erzen mentions about the network of relationships between everything which occurs jointly at that moment in the time – space interface. She adds that this situation shows kinship between the creatures. Sharing among creatures is obligatory; however, not any creature exists by itself in way of being an introverted creature.

The main objective of this evaluation about life is appearing the outcomes of every practice devoted to “changing the existent” also on the things interfering them directly [6]. At this point, biophilia and necrophilia discussed by Fromm are conceived as in terms of biophilia and objectophilia respectively in this research. Because, urban life faced to the production of objects; during the process of adoring to the objects, a person, not surprisingly, is converted into an object by itself. Therefore, individuals are treated as numerical data; they are governed as dead objects in metropolis and within its social areas [8]. Life created regarding to the systematic of control is discussed by Benjamin, too. He mentions that modern society people do not live the life itself; they are in the replica of life which is aestheticized by the actors of life, imposed to them as an obligation [4]. The being of aestheticized is not a reality; on the contrary, the things placed vis-a-vis are anymore not a play of forms, they indeed turn into values. Therefore the forms consume each other and they become values in this generalised aestheticization. Today, the connection between the lives has been broken and our interests towards the objects updating frequently by value systems have been increased. Consequently life becomes more homogenized and mechanic. The systematic of control, depend on the production and consumption of objects, is not eligible to develop the realization of life thoroughly, because life cannot be comprehended through the discourses of quality. There is not any “qualified tree, qualified sea, qualified river, qualified animal”; human is being shaped by the ambient conditions in which they grow like other existences. The conditions of life are hidden under the nature before the whole artefacts. Nature and individuals are interwoven things which are not separable each other.

The discussions about life by Spinoza in the publication of Ethics can be reference point of this paper. He claims that “No one can desire to be blessed, to act rightly, and to live rightly, without at the same time wishing to be, act, and to live - in other words, to actually exist.” [9]. In this statement, acting obviously is not used as directly in the meaning of building. Herein, there is an extensive discussion about ethics including the impacts



Figure 1. A reading over Izmit: There is not any “qualified tree, qualified sea, qualified river, qualified animal in the nature. The concept of quality is manufactured by the human” (Photo by Ergin Keçeli)

(behaviour, discourse, act) to each parameters of us and surroundings under the requirements of “being”; thereby, the production of spaces is elucidated as one of those impacts.

Taking into account the appraisal, tendency of architecture towards “transform the existing” implies how architecture practice relates to the life. “Building, dwelling and thinking” by Heidegger can be initiated by this statement; every contact with ground and every intervention to it by cultivating or building shape our existence which is the sum of life. As Erzen stated, “the potential power of earth is the most basic material of our nature, cities, art and architecture” [5]. Major architecture discipline takes this material as a basic parameter and appraises the production of image thus implicitly objectophilia.

After discussing the philosophy under the relationship between nature and architecture, a question is emerged whether the architecture discipline- competing for “transforming the existing” as a production tool – may display a sensitivity to accompany the nature including all species for the case of Izmit. In this context, the main challenge is to show how daily life of historical, constantly growing and earthquake prone Izmit disperses from the nature; to highlight the importance

of participatory and collective approaches to all city life stakeholders by looking towards city vision of local authorities and to point out the essential signs belong to the future for the relations between society and nature of Izmit (Figure 1).

3. The layers of Izmit

3.1. Brief history of area In this part brief history of area will be present from 6th century till now including pre-Roman period, Roman Empire period, Byzantine Empire, Ottomans Empire and Republic of Turkey eras. At the beginning of 6th century BC, Astakos was founded 6 km southeast of the current Izmit city center; nowadays it is located between the districts of Başiskele and Gölcük. The area was under domination by Phrygia, Lidia, Achaemenid Empire until Bithyinia Empire (297 – 274 BC) which was established by Bithyins, a branch of Thracians. Roman Empire Diocletian invaded Nicomedia in 284 and made the city capital of Roman Empire. There was not further development of Nicomedia after Constantinople became the capital city of the Empire; additionally the city was devastated by earthquakes. In turn, its glory



was diminished but Nicomedia sustained its importance due to the location of the city. Nicomedia was under dominance of Turks who had invaded Anatolia in 11th century. In 1078, Nicomedia was governed by Anatolian Seljuk Empire. However in 1085, Byzantine emperor Alexios regained the southern coast of Marmara as well as Nicomedia [10]. The town was under the dominance of Byzantium until 1337. From this time İzmit became a province of the Ottoman Empire.

Until 19th century, the scale of city did not change dramatically. During the Ottoman - Russia War in 1877-1878, the Muslim population (who migrated from Rumeli and Eastern Black sea) settled in the territory. Istanbul - Ankara railway was built through the city in 1873. Izmit was part of Istanbul until 1888 when it became a separate city. Currently it is central district of Kocaeli Province. Prior to the War of Independence the city was liberated from English and Greek armed

occupation in the beginning of 20th century. The province of Kocaeli was founded on 20 April 1924 just after the proclamation of the Republic. The industry sector has always been prior in the economic life of the city. In 1927, a navy yard was established in south part of city coastline of Marmara Sea. SEKA, a paper factory, was founded in 1934 as one of the first industrial investments of the Turkish Government. In the 1960s, the State road was constructed on coastal part of İzmit and the Fair area was built on land reclamation in the 1970s [11]. The earthquake of 17 August 1999 struck the area which lead to national architectural and urban planning policies over the cities. Historical transformations until 21st century influence the earth and sky which is outlined in Figure 2. Post – earthquake decisions result in new residential buildings, new campus for Kocaeli University and office/industrial buildings in the free lands, rural areas of city. Current tissue of city can be seen in Figure 3.

Figure 2. The process of Izmit historically: Nature and urban tissue

Figure 3. Aerial view to Izmit Gulf, Izmit, Izmit Wetland and Sapanca Lake: Urban tissue in the nature



Besides, the city is close to İstanbul therefore it was developed by industry during the Republic period. Despite of its deep historical layers and rich natural richness, today the city has been exposed to aforesaid attacks and since then the values have been being lost. The research question is emerged whether the architecture discipline- competing for “transforming the existing” as a production tool – may display a sensitivity to accompany the nature including all species of Izmit. Because human being cannot be separated from existing; it is whereas the extension of existing by the nature. City forms whole factors penetrating to all the senses when we go out, shape our daily lives, ideas and even dreams.

3.2. Natural layers

Izmit is a place where the nature is marginalized in urban tissue via architectural acts. The prominent examples of nature are the wetland area, Izmit Gulf, Sapanca Lake, rivers, hills and mountains with all creatures around the settlements; architecture, construction productions and planning activities with the scope of image productions ignore the aforesaid fundamental element, nature. The red area in Figure 4 is suggested as national park without any constructions, although, factory, shopping malls and offices have been constructed. Natural wetland area and its mechanical surrounding are presented by aerial map.

In Figure 5, the comparison of wetland in October 2006 and September 2009 is presented. It is evident that the nature can repair itself. In Figure 6, the relation of nature, architecture and future of Izmit is shown.

3.3. Cultural layers

As mentioned in Part 3.1 the city hosts various civilizations and their artefacts. Continuity of these buildings and traditional tissues has met mass production economy, fast consumption and technological developments. In 21st century, contemporary conservation acts need holistic approach by high social participatory and awareness. Architectural heritage of the civilization of Roman Empire, especially Nicomedia and Byzantine Empire do exist however it is not perceived in daily life; it is known that underground archaeological structure/assets remains, some of them which had survived for a long time have been demolished – damaged or to be removed and some found during the production of buildings in 19th and 20th century are exhibited in museums and finally the rest play an role as a foundation for the contemporary buildings. Tendency of architecture towards “transform the existing” is attained in this perspective of Izmit. In Figure 7 and 8, 16th century historical mosque and 18th century hammam building in current conditions are presented.

Figure 4. Focal point of Izmit: Wetland and urban tissue. Recent post – earthquake structures in wetland (Emre Demirtaş photo archive)



Figure 5. The comparison of Izmit wetland in 2006 and 2009 (Emre Demirtaş photo archive)

Figure 6. The relation of nature – architecture and future (Emre Demirtaş photo archive)

Figure 7. Current conditions of Pertev Paşa Mosque (constructed in 16th century) with urban planning and architecture activities of 21st century (Emre Demirtaş photo archive)



Figure 8. Current condition of Hammam (Turkish bath) constructed in 18th century with biological growth (Emre Kishalı photo archive)

Figure 9. Contemporary built environment of Izmit I: Example of degenerating earth and standardising of human via Auto Park on land reclamation (Emre Demirtaş photo archive)

3.4. Contemporary built environment Post-earthquake measures include new regulations which are Act on Disaster Prevention (no. 6306); Turkish Earthquake Code (2007); Act on the Integration of Local Government (6360) and laws for Social Housing Administrations (TOKI) shape the contemporary built environment of big cities in Turkey. Izmit and rural areas

have been influenced too by the construction activities in terms of transforming the nature in the context of objectophilia. In Figure 9, Auto Park on filled land in coastline and in Figure 10 high –rise buildings on the hills are presented. In 2016, new transportation system planned for Izmit is being constructed through the existing city pattern including historical, natural and socio-cultural objects (Figure 11).



Figure 10. Contemporary built environment of Izmit II: Example of degenerating earth and standardising of human via high-rise buildings on the hills (Emre Demirtaş photo archive)

Figure 11. Pre-intervention of tramway construction through existing nature layer in the walk side (Emre Kishalı photo archive)



4. Conclusion In this paper, industrialization and globalization impacts on urban identity in 21st century and its specific example of Izmit are elucidated. Furthermore, the critics about architecture practice are summarised as contemporary architecture activities and the concepts of locality; ecology; sustainability; social responsibility go hand in glove, however it is seen that architecture is fundamentally more adaptable to finance and economy for building productions. Designing shapes the cities via making buildings, based on the standardization of production not the correspondences of human and earth or nature and society. In short, the action of making of which fundamental is to dwell on earth is transformed into production of spaces sustaining the control systematics. This situation breaks human beings from the discontinuous, unplanned, cyclical, holistic and experimental origin of nature. The severity of this disconnection increases every day, so the cities are becoming more and more mechanic.

The vital research question is emerged whether the architecture discipline- competing for “transforming the existing” as a production tool – may display a sensitivity to accompany the nature including all species for the case of Izmit. Because human being cannot be separated from the existing; it is whereas the extension of existing by the nature. In this context, the arguments related to the future of architecture and urban are revealed after identifying the nature as principal property as beyond-control power and establishing the approaches following rational – intuition axis. Some suggestions are summarised as:

• Human and nature cannot be dissociated and each approach should be developed via this consciousness. This social awareness should be established in local, national and professional education fields.

• Integrated conservation plans are needed in order to present and realise that social, cultural and architectural heritage survived are very inexperienced considering 21st century developments.

• It is necessary that we are responsible for each creature while producing, manufacturing and constructing. It is also essential that the cultural, economic and social tools need to be produced in order to integrate the participatory architecture with collective life.

• Holistic development objectives are ought to be established leading to the dialectic of plan and projects instead of short-termed, segmental, palliative solutions. This dialectic prevents urban

identity, evolved for centuries, from disappearing.

• Local community, non-governmental organizations, various associations, professional chambers and research institutes, universities should be included to all aforesaid solutions.

• Nature, fundamental element, should be centralized for participatory life and all. Long-term workshops, meetings, legislations are proposed in this exiting systems for analysing, synthesising and the future of the places where built environment meets sea, forests and earth. New zonings and constructions should re-consider considering this objective by all stakeholders.

Acknowledgement This paper was presented in S.ARCH 2016 Next Architecture conference in May 2016, the authors revised the manuscript and added complementary figures to the publication in the context of discussion. The authors would like to thank the scientific and organization committee of the conference.

References [1] Arendt Hannah, Between Past and Future- Six

Exercises in Political Thought, Viking Press, New York, USA, 1996.

[2] Heidegger Martin, Building Dwelling Thinking, Poetry, Language, Thought, Harper & Row, New York, USA, 1971.

[3] Kiesler Frederick, Modern Mimarlıkta Sözde İşlevselcilik (Pseudo-Functionalism in Modern Architecture) http://www.e-skop.com/skopdergi/modern-mimarlikta-sozde-islevselcilik/1950 Retrieved on 15 April 2016.

[4] Baudrillard Jean, Nouvel Jean, Tekil Nesneler: Mimarlık ve Felsefe (Singular Objects of Achitecture translated into Turkish by Aziz Ufuk Kılıç), Yem Yayın, İstanbul, Turkey, 2011.

[5] Jale N. Erzen, Üç Habitus: Yeryüzü, Kent, Yapı (Three Habitus: Earth, City and Building) Yapı Kredi Yayınları, İstanbul, Turkey, 2015.

[6] Erich Fromm, The Heart of Man: Its Genius for Good and Evil, American Mental Health Foundation, New York, USA, 2010.

[7] Humberto R. Maturana, Francisco G. Verala, The Tree of Knowledge: The Biological Roots of Human



Understanding, Shambala Publications, Boston, USA, 1992.

[8] Oskay Ünsal, Walter Benjamin Üzerine (About Walter Benjamin) in Estetize Edilmiş Yaşam (Aesthteticized Life, Turkish) (Ed. Ünsal Oskay), Der Yayınları, İstanbul, 1995.

[9] Spinoza Benedictus, Ethics in Spinoza Complete Works (Ed. Michael L. Morgan),Hackett Publishing Company, Indianapolis, USA, 2002.

[10] Çalık Ayşe Ross, Ancient İzmit: Nicomedia, Delta Yayınları, İstanbul, Turkey 2007.

[11] Binici Özden Senem, İzmit’te 1936-1966 Yılları Arasındaki Yapı Üretiminin Kentin Gelişimine Etkileri (The Impacts of Building Productions during 1936 – 1966 in Izmit on Urban Development), Kocaeli University, Institute of Natural and Applied Sciences, unpublished master of science thesis, İzmit, Turkey, 2012.

an evaluation through nature and urban layers: the case of...

Documents