Architectural Continuity Towards Cultural Sustainability in Bodrum

Abstract

Mediterranean architecture is considered the predecessor of the modern concept of “bioclimatic” sustainable design due to its climate reactive attitude (Coch H. 1996, Vissilia, A.M. 2009). Another aspect which renders it to be associated with the notion of modern sustainability is the employment of recyclable materials such as natural stone and wood. The vernacular architecture of Bodrum peninsula located in southwestern Turkey bears the typical characteristics of Mediterranean architecture. Since the 1970s, Bodrum has been attracting the attention of local and foreign tourists. The “architectural pollution” created by tourism facilities paradoxically devastates the natural and unique architectural characteristics of Bodrum which attract the attention of tourists. In this article, the primary focus will be the residential architecture in Bodrum due to its quite dominant typology among tourism facilities. However, the local building regulations aiming to protect natural values and architectural identity and the sensitive attitudes of some architects about preserving architectural identity and visual ecology can be considered positive aspects with regards to the harmonious architectural development of the region. Visual ecology seems generally more vital than biophysical ecology in terms of sustainable tourism economy, and tourism, is the most important sector in Bodrum. In a touristic region such as Bodrum, cultural and economic sustainability are interrelated. Today, research related to sustainability focuses primarily on energy saving and relevant technological inventions and as a result, issues such as cultural expression, contextual connection, identity formation, local differences and changes do not get their deserved places in the sustainability value setting. This paper aims to detect some clues about the outline of the residential architecture within the context of cultural sustainability in Bodrum in the light of residential architecture samples.

Aspects of contextual architecture regarding traditional/contemporary architecture, physical/cultural and place identity: a systematic literature review

“…The focus of the studies' discussion can be divided, respectively, into three groups: the physical condition, both physical and cultural aspects, and only cultural aspects. The first group (18 studies, almost 42%) limited their definition of contextualism to only the physical aspects, attributes, patterns, characteristics and elements of the surrounding area and historical heritage (Frampton, 1993; Voordt and Wegen, 2005; Ayiran, 2011; Molaee and Mahdavinejad, 2013; Riza and Doratli, 2015; Saradj, 2016). On the one hand, this external description was mentioned in a broader perspective relating it to the nature law (appearance) or natural environmental aspects (Xu, 2017), including geographical (Guimaraes, 2012), climatic aspects and built environment features (Çizgen, 2012).…”

“…, 2019). Despite the widespread agreement on the critical role of cultural aspects, studies still limit contextualizing the building through the visual aspects (Ayiran, 2011; Lambe and Dongre, 2019; Riza and Doratli, 2015; Saradj, 2016; Scotland, 2010), highlighting the disconnect between what has been said and what has been done, which requires further discussion.…”

“…Journal article 43 Heidegger (1971), Ray (1980), Lucan (1992), Norberg-Schulz (1992), Portoghesi (1992), Frampton (1993), Brown (1997), Otero-Pailos (2000), Dey (2001), Dodds (2001), Gausa et al (2003), Schaffer (2004), Baldauf et al (2007), Radford (2009), Ayiran (2011), El-Shorbagy (2011), Guimaraes (2012), Henriques (2012), Jencks (2012), Masoud and Beikzadeh Shahraki (2012), Allen (2013), Molaee and Mahdavinejad (2013), Sotoudeh and Wan Abdullah (2013), Salama (2014), Tøsse (2014), Abedi and Iravani (2015), Harding et al (2015), Komez-Daglioglu (2015), Riza and Doratli (2015), Salama and Grichting (2015), Zhou and Zhang (2015), Saradj (2016)…”

“…First, although the majority of discussions have emphasized the importance of considering both physical and cultural aspects of contextual architecture, there is a noticeable focus on understanding contextual aspects through the extrinsic aspects neglecting the intrinsic ones (Salama, 2014;Rhee et al, 2019). Despite the widespread agreement on the critical role of cultural aspects, studies still limit contextualizing the building through the visual aspects (Ayiran, 2011;Lambe and Dongre, 2019;Riza and Doratli, 2015;Saradj, 2016;Scotland, 2010), highlighting the disconnect between what has been said and what has been done, which requires further discussion.…”

Revitalization Model for Ancient Buildings and Environment in The Cultural Heritage Village Kauman Surakarta

“…The use of ancient houses should have been developed, apart from being a place to live, they also functioned as batik showrooms, cafes, and others, as was done at Ketib Anom II's house [1], see figure 7. The development of cultural values aims to improve the welfare of the owners of these ancient buildings [12]. The result of usage is done through negotiation or adaptive reuse, which involves altering existing buildings' functions to fit current needs while preserving their original form and inherent cultural meanings.…”