INDUSTRIAL HERITAGE IN THE URBAN IDENTITY AND MEMORY AXIS

Industrial Heritage in the Urban Identity and Memory Axis

2012: 224). Today, however, it is planned to design the old wine works, which remained
idle for a long while after its production had been halted, as a museum within the scope of
Mahall Bomonti Project, carried out by Türkerler İnşaat (Photo 8).

In our interview with the authorized people from Türkerler İnşaat, which initiated
the construction of the Project in 2017, it was learned that a site to consist of 12 blocks,
9 of which would be historic, would be designed within the scope of Mahall Bomonti
Project with a building site of 41 thousand and 520 square meters and that the old wine
works would be conserved as a museum and included in the living space.

Besides the concerts, exhibitions, and panel discussions organized, the actively-
used restaurant and café section has formed a beautiful attraction center in the city.

If the restorations of the building, located in the urban pattern for long years, are
carried out by adhering to the required procedures and if the works can be converted into
a true museum instead of a building only the exterior walls of which have been preserved,
it will form a beautiful example in terms of the use of old industrial buildings within the
urban identity through their adaptive reuse.

Alsancak Silos of the TMO (the Soil Products Office): In consequence of the
developments that took place in the fields of agricultural trade and industrialization in the
second half of the 19th century, reinforced concrete silo facilities began to be constructed
in important cities and ports that qualified as granaries in the world. Due to their forms,
which carry the forms and masses of modern architecture, and their interior structures,
which are a kind of developed machine, these buildings qualify as architectural and
industrial heritage.

However, today some of these buildings lose their functions and are abandoned
for various reasons, whereas they are sometimes destroyed by demolishing. On the other
hand, the silo examples which underwent adaptive reuse with successful interventions in
developed countries after they had lost their original function show that these buildings
can maintain their existence with a change in function (Taddonio et al., 2016: 76).

Besides the examples abroad, the silo of the TMO (the Soil Products Office) in
Eskişehir forms a beautiful example of the adaptive reuse of these buildings. After the

Photo 9. Alsancak Silos of the TMO, (1960). Photo 10. Alsancak Silos of the TMO, (2018).
Source: APİKAM Source: A. Karadağ.

349

Axis of Urban Identity and Memory Industrial Heritage... Arife KARADAĞ - Leman İNCEDERE

completion of its restoration in 2007, the silo in Eskişehir began to be used as a hotel.
The silo building of the Soil Products Office located in Alsancak district in İzmir was
constructed in 1958. Located at the intersection of the railway network, the hinterland
of the port, and the other industrial sites that all developed in the city in the historical
process, this building has a feature that symbolizes the agricultural richness of the
city. This building, an essential component of the urban identity, should be conserved
as modern architectural heritage and handed down to future generations. In this line,
the organization of the building as a hotel, as in the example in Eskişehir, is on the
agenda.

Alsancak Flour Mill: Discovered to be one of the six flour mills determined in
İzmir industrial censuses carried out in 1913-1915 in the area in and around Alsancak
stadium defined as Darağacı District, the building began to be used as Yaşar University
(Alsancak Campus) with the restorations carried out in 2001. The campus building, which
is in the hinterland of the port and is one of the old industrial buildings, was established
with the adaptive reuse of the flour mill constructed in 1895. The building underwent
comprehensive repair work in 1941 and the wooden interior load-bearing elements were
renovated and modernized by converting them into reinforced concrete elements then,
as required by the use. However, originality was preserved on the faces of the building,
which underwent profound changes in the structural sense (Özsoy, 2011). It became an
important pioneer in İzmir in that the basic structure of an industrial building which was
of historical value and which was stuck in the city was conserved and reintroduced to the
urban life with a new function.

The building was transferred to Yaşar Education and Culture Foundation in 1996
in order for it to be used as an educational and cultural center. This old mill, which began

Photo 11. The use of the Old Flour Mill as Photo 12.Selçuk Yaşar Museum restoration of the
Alsancak Campus of Yaşar University, (2017). Old Flour Mill, (2018).
Source: L. İncedere. Source: L. İncedere.

to be used as İzmir Yaşar University in 2001, is now being restored again in order to be
converted into Selçuk Yaşar Museum by Yaşar Education and Culture Foundation.

350

Industrial Heritage in the Urban Identity and Memory Axis

The Old Electricity Factory: To meet the need of İzmir for electricity, it was decided
to establish the factory in Alsancak with the cooperation between the municipality and
the Belgian company Traction-Elektricite in 1925. In 1926, the building site belonging to
Muhasebe-i Hususiye (Special Administration) close to the Gasworks was expropriated
for the establishment of the electricity factory. The electricity factory was put into service
in 1928; however, all prerogatives of the company were abolished in 1943 and it was
transferred to the government (Kurt, 2012: 160-161).

After the transfer of the factory to the Turkish Electricity Authority in 1971,
production was halted at the factory in 1989 on the grounds that the factory completed
its economic life. İzmir Power Station and its landscape were registered as a 2nd-Group
Cultural Property in Need of Protection with the Resolution of 1998 by İzmir Board No. 1
for the Conservation of Cultural and Natural Properties (Köktürk et al., 2015). Upon the
halting of production at the factory, the factory equipment and devices of considerable
importance for the history of industry were scrapped, were not conserved, and were left
to disappear.

Photo 13. The old electricity factory, (the 1950s). Photo 14. The old electricity factory, (2018).
Source: APİKAM, 2018 Source: L. İncedere.

The Historic Electricity Factory is one of the most beautiful industrial heritage
buildings in İzmir in terms of both its location and the architecture of the building since
it is located among such historic industrial buildings as the Gasworks and Sümerbank,
the housing areas, and the depots in the Hinterland of Alsancak Port, which is bordered
by İzmir Port in the north, Alsancak Railway Station and railway line in the west, and the
bypass in the east. Despite its important way of construction that displays the technology
of its period and its important place in the urban memory, the factory is disappearing as
no repair and renovation interventions are made.

Today the factory is encircled by wire netting and the structure, which consists of
four rectangular buildings, is quite convenient for adaptive reuse in spite of the presence of
damage on its roof and in its interior areas. Particularly in the recent years, various actions
have been made by nongovernmental organization employees and political actors for the
conservation of the factory and the panel discussion “İzmir Claims its Electricity Factory”
was held on 4 April 2018 with the cooperation between İzmir Branch of the Chamber of
Architects and the Claim İzmir Platform. In these studies, it was stressed that the main

351

Axis of Urban Identity and Memory Industrial Heritage... Arife KARADAĞ - Leman İNCEDERE

station building, which was suffering from more and more deformation with every passing
day, as well as the depot, the repair workshops and the personnel building located again at
the site should be projected without delay and that their necessary maintenance and repair
work should be carried out.

İzmir Oriental Industry: Şark Sanayi (Oriental Industry) was a Belgian company
established with the name “Industrielle du Levant Societe Anonyme” in Brussels – a city in
Belgium – in 1893 before the Republic. While the company was operating in Turkey, its
operation was terminated under the law enacted in 1924 on foreign joint-stock companies.

In order to replace this company and to be conducted by the same personnel, it
was transferred to a new management under
the name “Şark Sanayii Kumpanyası T.A.Ş.”
in 1925 and it acquired a significant place in
the economy of both İzmir and the country
for long years. Until the facility of İzmir Şark
Sanayi went bankrupt and was shut down
in 1976, it had carried on its production of
thread, textiles, and printed cloth as one of
the big textile factories in İzmir (Sipahioğlu,
2012: 95).
Photo 15. İzmir oriental industry, (1960).

Source: APİKAM, 2018. Located within its land of 43 thousand

square meters at the intersection of Şehitler
Avenue and İşciler Avenue at Umurbey
Neighborhood in Alsancak, İzmir Şark
Sanayi maintained its feature of being one of
the first big industrial factories of the region
for long years.

This company, one of the oldest
industrial establishments in the Aegean
Photo 16. İzmir oriental industry, (2018). Region, made great contributions to the
Source: L. İncedere. economy of Turkey particularly in the 1950s.

The company went bankrupt and was shut
down in 1976. Today the land of Şark Sanayi Kumpanya Factory is owned by the Koru
and Paralı Families. It was announced by Koru Group that projects complying with the
development plan would be implemented on the land in the future. A fire broke out on
the land of the factory in 2016, but the registered historic buildings within the land were
not damaged by the fire.

Sümerbank Printed Cloth Industry Establishment: Located on Şehitler Avenue,
the enterprise spreads over a land of about 160,000 m2 in size. The foundations of the
extant buildings of the enterprise, whose establishment dates back to 1942-43, were laid in
1949 (İzmir Kent Ansiklopedisi, 2013: 89). Following the opening of the thread and textile
factories in 1953 and of the printed cloth factory in 1955, İzmir Sümerbank Premises with

352

Industrial Heritage in the Urban Identity and Memory Axis

the name “Sümerbank İzmir Basma Sanayi Müessesesi” served İzmir, the Aegean Region,
and Turkey for long years (Photo 17).

The premises house the thread, textile, and printed cloth factories, a ready-to-
wear clothing unit, a power plant, workshops, warehouses, a social center, staff houses for
officers, a day nursery, sporting areas, and parks that provided the functions of production,
socialization, residing, training, and recreation. Following the judicial process of İzmir
Sümerbank, which was included in the scope of privatization in the 1980s like many
other Sümerbank premises but which carried on its production until the early 2000s, its
production department was transferred to the Special Provincial Administration in order
to be used for training purposes, while its western section was transferred to the Civil
Defense (Arıtan and Sayar, 2009: 21-22).

The buildings of İzmir Basma Sanayii Müessesesi and many of the production tools
at the factory were destroyed following the privatization process that commenced as of 1987.

Photo 17. Sümerbank printed cloth industry Photo 18. Sümerbank printed cloth industry
establishment, (1950). Establishment, (2018).
Source: Er, 2011. Source: A. Karadağ.

Following the privatization process, significant demolition started at Sümerbank
premises, which spread over a considerably vast area consisting of production and
production support buildings, staff houses, and social facilities. Some of the buildings
were demolished and Industrial Vocational High Schools were established on the land by
the Ministry of National Education. Additionally, some idle buildings are used as parking
lots (Photo 18). Disorder and neglect predominate on the land of the factory. The
demolition of the thread and textile factories found at the site and having an important
place in terms of industrial heritage was a significant loss for the cultural and exhibition
studies to be carried out at the factory. The land and buildings of İzmir Sümerbank
Basma Sanayi Müessesesi, a beautiful example of Sümerbank facilities with a crucial
place in the development of the country after the Republic, should be expropriated and
transferred to İzmir Metropolitan Municipality in order to end the negative situations
created by privatization and they should be subjected to adaptive reuse with a project
convenient for their value.

353

Axis of Urban Identity and Memory Industrial Heritage... Arife KARADAĞ - Leman İNCEDERE

The Cigarette Factory of TEKEL: The Tobacco Factory (Photo 19) established in
İzmir in 1884 soon became one of the biggest industrial establishments of the region.
İzmir Cigarette Factory halted its production when it was transferred to the state from the
Regie and production was restarted after it had passed to the administration of TEKEL.
The production areas of İzmir Cigarette Factory, which employed 2 thousand workers in
1975 and which is a significant heritage site in terms of the industry in İzmir, could not
be conserved. No alteration to the front façade of the factory was made; however, some
buildings were added to the back side of the building. Located on a valuable land, the
factory is still idle today (Photo 20). The building is described as a living museum owing
to its structure, which has witnessed history (Serçe, 2014).

Photo 19. İzmir Tekel Tobacco Factory, (the 1950s). Photo 20. İzmir Tekel Tobacco Factory, (2018).

Source: The Archive by Yaşar Ürük, 2017. Source: A. Karadağ.

The Old Tekel Factory is at an important point in terms of its location. Sites of
historical, cultural and touristic importance such as the Museum of State Railways, the
Mask Museum, and Yaşar Painting Museum and Art Gallery are located around the
factory, which is at a distance of 100 meters from Alsancak Train Station, at a distance of
several hundred meters from Alsancak Port, and quite close to the Gasworks. Following
the shutdown of the factory, which was quite valuable in terms of industrial heritage and
was at a central location, through privatization in 2002, it was decided to transfer it to the
ministry in 2006.

In 2013, it was taken from the Ministry of Culture and Tourism for 25 years by
Nevvar-Salih İşgören Foundation and project studies were launched concerning its
conversion into an educational and instructional facility for cultural and artistic purposes.

Other industrial heritage sites and buildings located at
the city center of Izmir

the Hinterland of Alsancak Port was selected as the focal point for the establishment
of large industrial enterprises particularly in line with the planning studies in the post-
Republican period. Nevertheless, except for these industrial buildings, the Customs Building
and Kızlarağası Inn with a significant place in the early years of the foundation of the city;
the Sirkehane (Vinegar House), located in Bornova and currently used as an ethnography

354

Industrial Heritage in the Urban Identity and Memory Axis

museum; the Old DYO Factory; METAŞ Iron Factory, which was established at Işıklar
Neighborhood, Bornova in 1955 and which is beginning to collapse today; the old Water
Factory established in Halkapınar; Altınbaşak Flour Factory, the Old Piyale Factory, and Kula
Mensucat in Bayraklı; Turyağ Factory, which was established in Bayraklı (Turan) in 1916
and which is idle today; Civas Bolt Factory, which was established again in Bayraklı in 1954,
used as Soyer Cultural Center from 2006 to 2015, then bought in 2015 by Avcılar İnşaat, and
completely demolished for a 38-storey skyscraper project planned to be comprised of home
offices, a shopping center, and social areas; and the Old Lead Factory, which was established
in Gaziemir in 1940 and which is idle today as it was moved to Torbalı in 2010, are among
the essential industrial sites and buildings that gained a place in the urban memory in İzmir.

The Old Customs Building: In the mid-19th century, the French people asserted that the
coastline was narrow and that the ships did not dock and they filled the point where Basmane
Railway Station joined the sea in order to use it as the customs commodity storage area.

The Customs Building was completed in 1854 (Photo 21). A second building
with the same plan and structural construct was constructed at the tip of the continually
developed infill after the 1860s and a storey was added in the early 1900s. Upon the
multiplication of the customs enterprises, a third customs building was constructed in the
middle of the infill area in 1865-70.

Photo 21. The Customs Building, 1905. Photo 22. A View of Konak Pier, (2018).
Source: https://ege.gtb.gov.tr/kurumsal/izmir- Source: A. Karadağ.
gumrukleri-tarihcesi

The storage areas between the buildings were covered by cast columns and steel-
section roof trusses and a lean-to was added to its southern face by using new cast columns.
Finally, the sea was filled once more in 1905-1913; moreover, a large hall section where
circular cast-iron columns, U-section columns and steel-section roof trusses were used
was added over this area and it acquired its current state.

Used as the Customs Building until 1954, the building was organized as a wholesale
fish market in 1955-1960 by the municipality and the building was named “fish market”.
After serving as a parking lot for a short while, it underwent repair work and functional
transformation in 2002 and was put into service as a shopping space under the name
“Konak Pier” (İzmir Kent Ansiklopedisi, 2013, Photo 22). Today this site is used as a social
facility which comprises restaurants, cafés, stores, and a cinema.

355

Axis of Urban Identity and Memory Industrial Heritage... Arife KARADAĞ - Leman İNCEDERE

Kızlarağası Inn: Kızlarağası Inn, one of the important buildings for İzmir, is
located in a district known as Halim Ağa Bazaar in Kemeraltı. The inn was constructed in
1745. Being one of the rare works in İzmir that have survived up to the present time from
the Ottoman architecture (Çiçek, 2006: 2), Kızlarağası Inn is located within City Block No.
337 in the area encircled by Copper Bedesten on Street No. 906 and by Street No. 871 in
Kemeraltı (Photo 23).

The façade of the two-storey building with a courtyard and an almost square
rectangular mass was built in a decorative order with rows of stones and bricks (Kuban,
2009). In parallel with the fact that İzmir entered a regression process in the field of foreign
trade in the 1980s, the tensions and clashes between modern building and traditional
building began to be seen on the physical structure of Kızlarağası Inn as well. The inn
acquired its place in the urban life with its new identity following the debatable restoration
process that lasted for a long time (Işık, 2010: 196).

In parallel with the transformation concerned, trade began to be conducted in
Kemeraltı in different ways and reconstruction problems were experienced at this site for
a long period of time. In the recent past, however, Kızlarağası Inn underwent a significant
building process together with many inns around it.

It was brought forward many times that the building, which both wore physically
and was destroyed due to the workshop uses in it, required restoration and a cooperative
on this issue could be established only as of 1985. A contract on the restoration of the
building was signed in 1988 and the building was put into service as a result of an
application that covered about five years.

In consequence of the application, which was criticized for the carrying out of
partial reconstruction, a life that was very different from the former one and that was
determined by such uses as souvenir sellers, second-hand book sellers, and antique
dealers as well as by buildings such as coffee houses and restaurants was constructed in
the historic space. It was intended to have the public opinion adopt new Kızlarağası Inn
through such activities as panel discussions and concerts held as well as through activities
like “Kemeraltı Days” besides the celebrations in the period of its opening (Kayın, 2001:
70). Although Kızlarağası Inn (Photo 24) was designed as a touristic space, it has not
received adequate attention or has had adequate liveliness.

Photo 23. Kızlarağası Inn (the 1960s). Photo 24. Kızlarağası Inn, (2018).
Source: Aktepe, 1971. Source: L. İncedere.

356

Industrial Heritage in the Urban Identity and Memory Axis

Now that the location of the inn is not in sight very much, drawing the attention of
domestic and foreign tourists by using various signboards and visual elements, making the
necessary landscape arrangements around the inn and eliminating the elements which create
visual pollution are thought as the elements which may enable this site to receive more attention.

İzmir Water Factory: The studies to establish a water network in İzmir in general
started when a privilege on this issue was granted to İzmir Şehri Osmanlı Anonim Şirketi
in 1893. Upon the establishment of İzmir Suları Türk Anonim Şirketi, the network began
to be set up, with the water source of Halkapınar to be utilized (Gedikler, 2012: 83). The
facilities of İzmir Water Factory, established in Halkapınar, consist of two main buildings
as the water collection depot and the pump station (Atay, 2015).

Photo 25. İzmir Water Factory, (the 1960s). Photo 26. İzmir Water Factory, (2018).
Source: Aktepe, 1971. Source: L. İncedere.

The site housing the water facilities, the water pool and the remains of Diana’s
Baths in Halkapınar first became the subject of conservation with Circular No. 152 by
the Directorate General for Antiquities and Museums of the Ministry of Culture in 1975
and considering the goal of determining, it was decided to take it under conservation.
The building of importance for our history of industry that was constructed in the late
19th century (1894) and that is known with the name “İzmir Water Factory” (Photo 26)
is located at this site today. The section used as the pump station at the Water Factory, the
highest and massive building at this site, has been well preserved with its interior parts,
space, and mechanism. A şadırvan fountain-style elegant building again with a water
connection, an octagonal form, and rich decorations is seen near the water factory.

The building is an example which carries the activity of producing goods and
services with mechanical tools and mechanisms as well as the original architectural
integrity created for them and it is also within the scope of industrial archaeology in this
respect. Given these characteristics, Halkapınar İZSU facilities were registered as a cultural
property in need of protection with Resolution No. 9731, dated 30.01.2002, by İzmir Board
No. 1 for the Conservation of Cultural and Natural Properties; it was proposed that when
the interior parts required renewal in the future, the old ones be conserved in the form
of a museum; and the district was declared a 3rd-degree archaeological site (Karakaya
and Çakmakçı, 2003). Even though various projects for use have recently appeared on
the agenda, the factory is still idle. The buildings are quite convenient for adaptive reuse.

357

Axis of Urban Identity and Memory Industrial Heritage... Arife KARADAĞ - Leman İNCEDERE

The restorations carried out may enable us to use the old water factory with a
significant place in the urban history as a new cultural and heritage site. The water source
at the site might be converted into a recreational and cultural activity area intertwined with
history for the public by performing the necessary refining and landscape arrangements.

The Old Sirkehane (Vinegar House) Building: It is supposed that a Greek family
had the museum building, which has survived up to the present time under the name
“Sirkehane”, constructed between the late 19th century and the early 20th century.

The back part of the building, transferred to the State Treasury of the Republic
of Turkey in 1943, was used as a vinegar and pickle production place in the 1960s by
the Chair of Food and Fermentation Technology in the Faculty of Agriculture at Ege
University, whereas its front part was used as a staff house. The building, the majority of
which has been demolished in the last twenty years, began to operate as “the Balkan and
Anatolian Clothing Museum of Ege University” at the end of the restoration completed in
2010 and it began to operate as a private museum supervised by the Ministry of Culture
under the name “the Ethnography Museum of Ege University” in the same year (Sönmez
et al., 2013: 10).

Photo 27. The Old Sirkehane (Vinegar House) Photo 28. The Old Sirkehane (Vinegar House) (2018)
Source:http://www.etnografyamuzesi.ege.edu.tr/ Source: A. Karadağ.
index.html

Located on Fevzi Çakmak Avenue in Bornova, the museum houses a comprehensive
exhibition which comprises Balkan and Anatolian clothes, traditional musical instruments,
and jewelry and which dates back to the 19th century.

The Old DYO Factory: In 1954, DYO Paint Factories were established at Bornova
district of İzmir also by using the contribution of Marshall Aid by Durmuş Yaşar and his
sons (Tunçgenç, 2015: 5, Photo 29). The factory, which is of distinct importance in that it
was the first corporate paint and varnish factory in Turkey (Gedikler, 2012), remained in
the ascending rent area of the city upon the increasing population and urbanization over
time and had to leave its place of establishment following the rapid industrialization, as
observed in many cities.

358

Industrial Heritage in the Urban Identity and Memory Axis

This factory site is currently being used as the campus area (Photo 30) of Yaşar
University (Bölge). The buildings at Selçuk Yaşar (Bölge) Campus are distinguished from
the buildings at Alsancak Campus in the hinterland of Alsancak Port by the unavailability
of historical assets in the structural sense. Since the old buildings at Alsancak Campus
are of historic value, their outer shell underwent a transformation process, although for
conservation purposes, whereas the buildings at Selçuk Yaşar (Bölge) Campus are not a
renovation carried out for conservation purposes.

Photo 29. DYO Paint Factory (1954). Photo 30. The Campus of Yaşar University, (2018).
Source: http://www.dyo.com.tr/dyo/tarihce Source: L. İncedere.

The old building characters of the campus are unreadable; however, the site is
important in that it has been conserved as it has left a mark on the urban memory (Özsoy,
2011).

Turyağ Factory: The facility started production as a small oil plant with English
capital in 1916 and the process in which it transformed into a factory commenced when
it was purchased first in 1928 by a German company and then in 1929 by Eastern and
Overseas Products Ltd. an English company (https://kentstratejileri.com/tag/turyag/).
The factory, where investments in the production of vegetable margarine were made in
this period, put the first vegetable margarine on the market in 1932.

Photo 31. Turyağ Factory, (1965). Photo 32. Turyağ Factory, (2000).
Source: https://kentstratejileri.com/tag/turyag/ Source: Sami Gürel

359

Axis of Urban Identity and Memory Industrial Heritage... Arife KARADAĞ - Leman İNCEDERE

Turyağ Factory was shut down in 2007 and upon the shutdown of the factory, İzmir lost
another most well-established industrial plant after the shutdown of 55-year Piyale Factory. A
project of constructing a residence building on the land of Turyağ Factory is on the agenda today.

Old Kula Mensucat: The factory was first established in Kula in 1930 by Sait
Çolak and it was later decided to move it to Bayraklı. The factory, which was moved to
Bayraklı district in 1951, comprises textile workshops and depots. It might be stated that
whilst Kula Mensucat resembles the premises of Sümerbank in terms of its clustering, it
is distinguished by the upper structure of the shell that consists of vaults. The blocks of
the factory used for the function of storage were covered with low vaults. In addition to
these blocks, the premises also house an energy generation building and administrative
buildings (İzmir Kent Ansiklopedisi, 2013: 100).

Photo 33. Kula Mensucat, (the 1960s). Photo 34. Kula Mensucat, (2018).
Source: İzmir Kent Ansiklopedisi, 2013 Source: A. Karadağ

The firm “Kula Mensucat” had to be sold in 1986 due to its deteriorating economic
state. Under different management, the factory still failed to survive and had to halt
production in 2005. The factory, which succeeded in entering the list of 100 industrial
establishments by İstanbul Chamber of Industry at the 36th rank in 1968, and its land have
recently been purchased by Ziraat Bank. It is planned to construct a Shopping Center on
a three-parcel land that also includes the factory building.

Piyale Factory: Production of pasta at a factory in Turkey first commenced with
the brand “Piyale”, which was established in 1922 by Hasan Tahsin Piyale. Industrialization
was positively affected by the arrival of electricity in İzmir in 1928 and Piyale Pasta Factory,
established in 1953, became one of the important and modern plants then (Baykara, 1994:
131). İzmir Piyale Factory, which was among the important factories of the country,
performed production for 54 years and then was shut down in 2003 also as a result of the
negative impacts created by the economic crisis experienced.

Located in Bayraklı, which is one of the old settlement units of İzmir and which
is rapidly getting out of its industrial identity, the factory is currently idle with its large
land and buildings. The news about the fact that the factory buildings will be demolished
and that its land will be used as a shopping center or a tourism facility has been in press
particularly recently.

360

Industrial Heritage in the Urban Identity and Memory Axis

Photo 35. Piyale Factory, (the 1970s). Photo 36. Piyale Factory, (2018).
Source: APİKAM, 2018. Source: L. İncedere.

Altınbaşak Flour Factory: Located at Adalet Neighborhood at Bayraklı district
and established in 1955 by Şevket Filibeli, Altınbaşak Flour Factory has been idle for about
a decade (Photo 37). Today it is planned to construct two 24-storey skyscraper projects on
the land where the building site of the factory is located.

Having operated at Bayraklı district for years, such well-established establishments
as Altınbaşak and Piyale Flour Factories, Turyağ, Kula Mensucat, and the Bolt Factory
began to be erased from the urban memory
by either moving them to another area or
shutting them down completely in line with
“the Master Development Plan for the New
City Center”, which was prepared by İzmir
Metropolitan Municipality and approved in
2003.

The Master Development Plan for
the New City Center consists of three main
zones, namely Turan Neighborhood in the Photo 37. Turyağ Factory, (2018).
north, Salhane District in the east, and the Source: L. İncedere.

Hinterland of the Port in the south. According to the plan, Turan Neighborhood was
largely planned for tourism and Salhane District, physically in the heart of the city, was
considered a central business site. It is seen that unlike these two zones, the old industrial
establishments remaining in the area and registered by the Council of Monuments in
the Hinterland of the Port were allocated for cultural and commercial use as special
project sites. No new building was recommended in this area, but it was considered
adequate to restore and use the existing buildings (Çıkış, 2009: 12). In line with the plan,
new residence buildings and business centers are constructed and an approach which
highlights the tourism and commercial sectors is displayed in Turan and Salhane districts,
which are quite important in terms of the old industrial heritage sites and buildings. It is
seen that the developers investing in the district multiplied after the plan had been put
into effect. It has been announced by many investment firms that many factory sites in the
district are planned to be converted into commercial, touristic or housing areas. However,
the well-established industrial establishments located in these districts – which were

361

Axis of Urban Identity and Memory Industrial Heritage... Arife KARADAĞ - Leman İNCEDERE

important industrial sites of İzmir for long years – are being completely removed instead
of conserving them through adaptive reuse and turning them into attraction centers in
terms of tourism, which is a significant loss in terms of the objective of handing the urban
identity and the urban memory down to future generations.

Discussion and Conclusions

The studies published in the field of industrial heritage mostly by architects
and engineers and, although in a smaller number, by historians and archaeologists
put emphasis on the restoration of buildings, examination of objects, elaboration of
dates, and technical issues, thereby causing them to be focused on. A very limited
level of study has been carried out in the field of social sciences, particularly
anthropology, sociology, and geography, despite the research areas exactly related
to the subject. Thus, it gets harder to understand the matters about the memory
relationship formed with place identity, participation of the local people, and the
industrial heritage sites and buildings. Having begun to draw attention in Turkey
only for the last twenty years, industrial heritage is generally regarded merely as
an economic source and its social and cultural values are disregarded. This also
applies to İzmir – an important city of trade and industry. When even the studies
on the determination and conservation of industrial heritage sites within the
urban pattern of İzmir are so limited, it seems rather hard to assess the importance
attached to the development of industrial heritage by the people of İzmir and their
awareness. Therefore, abundant research is required to make case study analyses in
certain contexts and to cast light on the issue in this way. The presence of serious
problems at the stage of conservation and planning of industrial heritage in İzmir
was discovered in the study, which was prepared considering this requirement. The
number of restored and actively-used buildings is very small in the city and these
buildings were generally subjected to adaptive reuse only by preserving the main line
of the building. No information on the previous uses of the buildings or no heritage
element reflecting their former uses was provided. Even the Gasworks, which is
used the most actively in the city and regarded as the most beautiful example of
industrial heritage, involves significant shortcomings to this end.

In order to preserve and sustain the uniqueness of a place, its memory
should be protected. We see that the industrial heritage sites and buildings which
are important elements of memory in the city of İzmir are particularly concentrated
in the Hinterland of Alsancak Port. Given the priceless historical and traditional
heritage of the scenes in this area, the historical and cultural sides may make it
possible to create an industrial cultural center with a very positive image that will
attract investors.

Nevertheless, it should be borne in mind that one should act very sensitively
in all the studies carried out in this area. It is essential to plan sustainable urban
conservation that provides mutual benefits for the environment, the industrial

362

Industrial Heritage in the Urban Identity and Memory Axis

heritage building, and the society. Thus, industrial improvement proposals should
be part of a general urban project which entails a comprehensive holistic approach
that encompasses all urban policy areas and which encourages heritage to reconcile
with social progress and sustainable economic development.

Especially designing the area between Salhane and Turan districts as a
commercial and touristic center with the Master Development Plan published in
2003 in order to organize the new city center of İzmir is quite significant for the
urban development of İzmir. However, the idle industrial sites and buildings in the
district are being erased from the urban memory by completely demolishing them,
which is an irreparable significant socio-economic and cultural loss.

The studies on the conservation and preservation of the former pattern of
the city by “the Directorate for the Historic Environment and Cultural Properties”,
established in 2002 by İzmir Metropolitan Municipality, are extremely pleasing in
terms of urban conservation and urban sustainability. Nevertheless, the industrial
sites and buildings, important elements in terms of urban conservation, should also
be included increasingly in the studies that İzmir Metropolitan Municipality carries
out in the field of urban conservation. Some 19 industrial sites (9 of which were
idle) located at the city center of İzmir and considered to have an important place in
the urban pattern could be addressed in this study.

It will be useful to carry out a more comprehensive study on the industrial
heritage in İzmir and to map these sites after determining them. Following the
preparation of the distribution maps concerned, drawing the industrial heritage
routes particularly with beautiful examples on urban, country, and continental
scales in Europe is regarded as an important step to design both our country and
particularly İzmir – our study area – as attraction centers in terms of industrial
heritage tourism. Our study on the industrial heritage routes for İzmir is ongoing.

363

Axis of Urban Identity and Memory Industrial Heritage... Arife KARADAĞ - Leman İNCEDERE

References Kandilci, Köran E., (2009). The Old Gasworks, the
Journal Ege Mimarlık, Issue: 70, 32-35.)
Aktepe, M., (1971). İzmir Hanları ve Çarşıları Hakkında
Ön bilgi. İstanbul Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Çıkış, Ş. (2009). Endüstriyel Bir Miras Alanında
yayınları. (Aktepe, M., (1971). Preliminary Information Dönüşüm: İzmir Liman Arkası Bölgesi. Ege Mimarlık.
on the Inns and Bazaars of İzmir. Publications by the 3/70: 10-13. (Çıkış, Ş. 2009. Transformation at an
Faculty of Letters at İstanbul University.) Industrial Heritage Site: Hinterland of İzmir Port. Ege
Mimarlık. 3/70: 10-13.)
Alfrey, J. and Putnam, T. (1992) The Industrial Heritage:
Managing Resources and Uses. Routledge. London. Cravatte, H., (1977). Introduction. In: Historic Town
Centres in the Development of Present Day Towns.
Atay, Ç. (2015). İzmir Bindokuzyüz, Ege Sanayicileri Council of Europe, Strasbourg.
ve İşadamları Derneği. İzmir. (Atay, Ç. (2015). İzmir
Bindokuzyüz, the Aegean Industrialists and Businessmen Çiçek, Ü. (2006). İzmir Konaklama Yapıları ve Tarihsel
Association. İzmir.) Gelişimi. İzmir Ticaret Odası. İzmir. (Çiçek, Ü. (2006).
Accommodation Buildings of İzmir and their Historical
Arıtan, Ö. ve Sayar, Y. (2009). İzmir Sümerbank Development. İzmir Chamber of Commerce. İzmir.)
Basma Sanayi Yerleşkesi ve Dönüşüm Süreçleri. Ege
Mimarlık, Sayı: 70, 20-25. (Arıtan, Ö. and Sayar, Y. Douet, J. 2013. Industrial Heritage Re-tooled: The Ticcih
(2009). Premises and Transformation Processes of İzmir Guide To Industrial Heritage Conservation. Taylor and
Sümerbank Basma Sanayi. Ege Mimarlık, Issue: 70, 20- Francis Publishing.
25.)
Edensor, T. (2005) Industrial Ruins: Aesthetics,
Bandarin, F. and Oers. R, O. 2012. The Historic Urban Materiality and Memory. Oxford: Berg.
Landscape Managing heritage in an urban century. A
John Wiley & Sons Publication. Er, F. D, (2011). Sümerbank İzmir Halkapınar Basma
Sanayi Müessesesi’ne Ait Desen Albümlerinin
Bandarin, F. (2016). New Approaches and New Tools iincelenmesi, Arşivlenmesi ve Korunması. Dokuz Eylül
for Urban Conservation. İdeal Kent. Sayı 19. Cilt 7, ss: Üniversitesi Güzel Sanatlar Enstitüsü, Sanatta Yeterlilik
341-346. (Bandarin, F. (2016). New Approaches and Tezi. İzmir. (Er, F. D, (2011). Examination, Archiving
New Tools for Urban Conservation. İdeal Kent. Issue 19. and Conservation of the Pattern Albums of Sümerbank
Volume 7, pp: 341-346.) İzmir Halkapınar Basma Sanayi Müessesesi. Thesis for
Proficiency in Art, Graduate School of Fine Arts, Dokuz
Baykara, T. (1994) Son Yüzyıllarda İzmir ve Batı Eylül University. İzmir.)
Anadolu. Uluslararası Sempozyumu Tebliğleri.
Akademi Kitap Evi. İzmir. (Baykara, T. (1994) İzmir and Ertin, G. (1998). Tarım Hayvancılık, Ormancılık,
Western Anatolia in the Recent Centuries. International Madenler ve Enerji Kaynakları, Türkiye’de Sanayi,
Symposium Papers. Akademi Bookstore. İzmir.) Ulaşım, Türkiye’de Turizm,Ticaret. Türkiye Coğrafyası,
Serter N, Ed., Anadolu Üniversitesi, Eskişehir. (Ertin, G.
Binney, M., Machin, F., Powell,. (1990) Bright Future: (1998). Agriculture, Animal Husbandry, Forestry, Mines,
Re-use of Industrial Buildings Save Britain’s Heritage and Energy Resources, Industry and Transport in Turkey,
England. Tourism and Trade in Turkey. Turkish Geography, Serter
N, Ed., Anadolu University, Eskişehir.)
Bozdemir, M. (2011). Osmanlı’dan Cumhuriyet’e
Endüstriyel Mirasımız. İstanbul Ticaret Odası Yayınları, Gedikler, H., G. (2012). 1950’li Yıllarda İzmir. Şenocak
İstanbul. (Bozdemir, M. (2011). Our Industrial Heritage Yayınları. İzmir. (Gedikler, H., G. 2012. İzmir in the
from the Ottoman Period to the Republic. Publications by 1950s. Şenocak Publications. İzmir.)
İstanbul Chamber of Commerce, İstanbul.)
Göregenli, M. (2015). Çevre Psikolojisi, İnsan Mekân
Castello L. (2006), City & Time and Places Bridging the İlişkileri. (3. Baskı). İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi
Concept of Place to Urban Conservation Planning. City Yayınları. İstanbul. (Göregenli, M. 2015. Environmental
& Time 2 (1): 5. Psychology, Human-Space Relationships. (3rd Edition).
Publications by İstanbul Bilgi University. İstanbul.)
Çelikoğlu, I., Baylan, S., Dikmen, E., Kandilci, Köran E.,
(2009). Eski Havagazı Fabrikası, Ege Mimarlık Dergisi, Hewison, R. (1987). The Heritage Industry. Methuen
Sayı: 70, 32-35. (Çelikoğlu, I., Baylan, S., Dikmen, E., Publishing. London.

364

Industrial Heritage in the Urban Identity and Memory Axis

ICOMOS – TICCIH, 2011. Joint ICOMOS – TICCIH Pompa İstasyonu. Mimarlık Dergisi, 370. (Kayın,
Principles for the Conservation of Industrial Heritage E. 2013. Criteria for Assessing the Conservation
Sites, Structures, Areas and Landscapes. https://www. Interventions in the Industrial Heritage and Terkos Pump
icomos.org/Paris2011/GA2011_ICOMOS_TICCIH_ Station. Journal of Architecture, 370.)
joint_principles_EN_FR_final_20120110.pdf
Köksal, G. (2005). İstanbul’daki Endüstri Mirası İçin
Işık, N,. E. (2010). “Kemaraltı Üzerinden İzmir’de Koruma ve Yeniden Kullanım Önerileri, İTÜ Fen
Ticari Yaşamın Değişen Niteliğine İlişkin Gözlemler”. Bilimleri Enstitüsü (Doktora Tezi). İstanbul. (Köksal,
Değişen İzmir’i Anlamak (Derleyenler, Yıldırım, D. G. (2005). Conservation and Reuse Proposals for
ve Haspolat, E.) Phoenix Yayınları. Ankara. (Işık, N,. the Industrial Heritage in İstanbul, Graduate School
E. 2010 “Observations on the Changing Quality of the of Natural and Applied Sciences at ITU (Doctoral
Commercial Life in İzmir via Kemeraltı”. Understanding Dissertation). İstanbul.)
Changing İzmir (Compiled by Yıldırım, D. and Haspolat,
E.) Phoenix Publications. Ankara.) Köksal, G. (2008) “Industrial Heritage in İstanbul”,
TICCIH Bulletin, sayı: 41, s. 6-7, İspanya (http://
İzmir Kent Ansiklopedisi, (2013). Tarih (Cilt 2). Ahmet www.ticcih.org/docs/1225208975_b41.pdf). (Köksal,
Piriştina KentArşivi ve Müzesi Yayını. İzmir. (İzmir Kent G. (2008) “Industrial Heritage in İstanbul”, TICCIH
Ansiklopedisi, (2013). History (Volume 2). Publication Bulletin, Issue: 41, p. 6-7, Spain (http://www.ticcih.org/
by Ahmet Piriştina City Archive and Museum. İzmir.) docs/1225208975_b41.pdf).)

Karadağ, A. (2000). Kentsel gelişim süreci, çevresel Köksal, G. (2013), “Kentsel Koruma ve Yenileme
etkileri ve sorunları ile İzmir. Titizler Yayınevi, İzmir. Bağlamında Sanayi Mirası: Bir Kamu Projesi Olarak
Ankara. (Karadağ, A. (2000). İzmir with its urban Seka Fabrikası Örneği”, Prof. Dr. Nur Akın’a Armağan
development process, environmental impacts, and Mimari ve Kentsel Koruma, YEM Yayın, s. 399-412,
problems.) İstanbul. (Köksal, G. 2013, “Industrial Heritage in
the Context of Urban Conservation and Renovation:
Karadağ, A. ve İncedere, L. (2017). “Türkiye’de A Case Study of Seka Factory as a Public Project”, in
Endüstri Mirasının Korunması” (Ed. Ferhat Aslan). honor of Prof. Dr. Nur Akın, Architectural and Urban
Türkiye Coğrafya Araştırmaları İçinde (13-42). Pegem Conservation, YEM Publication, p. 399-412, İstanbul.)
Akademi. Ankara (Karadağ, A. and İncedere, L. (2017).
“Conservation of Industrial Heritage in Turkey” (Ed. Köksal, G., (2015) “Kazıklı Kervansarayı Duvar
Ferhat Aslan). In the Turkish Geographical Studies (13- Restorasyonu ve İç Ek Yapısı”, VİTRA Kültür
42). Pegem Akademi. Ankara) Yapıları, VİTRA Yayını, İstanbul, s. 102-107.
(Köksal, G., (2015) “Wall Restoration of Kazıklı
Karakaya, H., ve Çakmakçı, A., Z,. (2003). Bir Su Caravansary and its Additional Interior Structure”,
Öyküsü: İzmir Su Fabrikası, İzmir Kent Kültürü Dergisi. VİTRA Cultural Buildings, VİTRA Publication,
Sayı: 6. (Karakaya, H., and Çakmakçı, A., Z,. (2003). A İstanbul, p. 102-107.)
Story of Water: İzmir Water Factory, Journal of İzmir
Urban Culture. Issue: 6.) Köktürk, G., Akkurt B., H., Tokuç, A,. (2015).
Yenilenebilir Enerji Alanında Sosyal Bilincin
Kayın, E. ve Şimşek, E. (2009). İzmir Havagazı Fabrikası Arttırılması; İSEM: İzmir Yenilenebilir Enerji Müzesi.
Endüstri Kompleksi Üzerine Yeniden Düşünmek, Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Mühendislik Fakültesi Fen
Ege Mimarlık Dergisi. Sayı: 70, 14-19. (Kayın, E. and ve Mühendislik Dergisi. Sayı: 51, 191-200. (Köktürk,
Şimşek, E. (2009). Rethinking the Industrial Complex G., Akkurt B., H., Tokuç, A,. (2015). Enhancement of
of İzmir Gasworks, the Journal Ege Mimarlık. Issue: 70, Social Consciousness in the Field of Renewable Energy;
14-19.) İSEM: İzmir Museum of Renewable Energy. Journal of
Science and Engineering of the Faculty of Engineering
Kayın, E. (2001). İzmir’de Tarihi Mekânlar ve Kentliler at Dokuz Eylül University. Issue: 51, 191-200.)
Arasında Yeniden Kurgulanan İlişkiler. İzmir Kent
Kültürü Dergisi. Sayı: 3, ss: 66-71. (Kayın, E. 2001. Kuban, D,. (2009). Türkiye’de Kentsel Koruma:
Reconstructed Relationships between Historic Spaces Kent Tarihleri ve Koruma Yöntemleri, Tarih Vakfı
and City Dwellers in İzmir. Journal of İzmir Urban Yurt Yayınları. İstanbul. (Kuban, D,. (2009). Urban
Culture. Issue: 3, pp: 66-71.) Conservation in Turkey: Urban Histories and
Conservation Methods, Yurt Publications of the
Kayın, E. (2013). Endüstri Mirasına Yönelik Koruma Foundation of History, İstanbul.)
Müdahalelerini Değerlendirme Ölçütleri ve Terkos

365

Axis of Urban Identity and Memory Industrial Heritage... Arife KARADAĞ - Leman İNCEDERE

KurtS.(2012).İzmir’deKamusalHizmetler(1805-1950). Taddonio, S,. Karabağ Akdeniz, E., Üstünes, Y,.
İzmir Büyükşehir Belediyesi Kent Kitaplığı. İ z m i r 2016. İzmir Alsancak Bölgesinde Toprak Mahsulleri
(Kurt S. (2012). Public Services in İzmir (1805-1950). Ofisi Silo Yapısı İçin Bir İşlevsel Dönüşüm Önerisi.
City Library of İzmir Metropolitan Municipality. İzmir) Mimar Dergisi, Sayı: 46, 73-76. (Taddonio, S,.
Karabağ Akdeniz, E., Üstünes, Y,. 2016. A Functional
Martal, A. (1992). Üç İzmir, İ.B.B Ahmet Piriştina Kent Transformation Proposal for the Silo Building of
Arşivi Müzesi. İzmir. (Martal, A. (1992). Three İzmirs, the Soil Products Office in Alsancak District, İzmir.
Ahmet Piriştina City Archive Museum of İ. M. M. İzmir.) Architect’s Journal, Issue: 46, 73-76.)

Orbaşli, A. 2002. Tourists in Historic Towns Urban Topal, H., (2013). İzmir Mimarlık Merkezi. Ege
Conservation and Heritage Management. Taylor & Mimarlık. Sayı: 86, 5-17. (Topal, H., (2013). İzmir
Francis e-Library published. London and New York. Architectural Center. Ege Mimarlık. Issue: 86, 5-17.)

Özsoy, M. (2011). Fabrikadan Üniversiteye. Ege Tunçgenç, M. (2015). Türk Boya Sanayisi. TMMOB.
Mimarlık Dergisi. Sayı: 79, 26-31. (Özsoy, M. İzmir. (Tunçgenç, M. (2015). Turkish Paint Industry.
(2011). From Factory to University. The Journal Ege TMMOB. İzmir.)
Mimarlık. Issue: 79, 26-31.)
Tümertekin, E., (1961). İzmir’de Sanayi
Rojas, E. (1999). Old Cities, New Assets: Preserving Faaliyetlerinin Bünyesi ve Dağılışı, Türk Coğrafya
Latin America’s Urban Heritage. Inter-American Dergisi. Sayı: 21, 45-62. (Tümertekin, E., (1961).
Development Bank. Washington Structure and Distribution of the Industrial Activities
in İzmir, Turkish Journal of Geography. Issue: 21, 45-
Serçe, E,. (2014). İzmir Tekel Sigara Fabrikası, Atatürk 62.)
Organize Sanayi Bölgesi Dergisi, Sayı 110. (Serçe,
E,. (2014). İzmir Tekel Cigarette Factory, Journal of Yetkin, S. (2001). İzmir İktisadının Tarihsel
Atatürk Organized Industrial Zone, Issue: 110.) Dönüşümleri. Kent Kitaplığı Dizini: 24, 21. Yüzyıl
Eşiğinde İzmir Uluslar Arası Sempozyum. İzmir
Serçe, E., (2015). Devlet, Sanayileşme ve İzmir. İzmir Büyük Şehir Belediyesi Kültür Yayını. İzmir. (Yetkin,
Atatürk Organize Sanayi Bölgesi Dergisi. Sayı: 113. (Serçe, S. (2001). Historical Transformations of the Economy
E., (2015). The State, Industrialization and İzmir. Journal of of İzmir. Index of the City Library: 24, İzmir
İzmir Atatürk Organized Industrial Zone. Issue: 113.) International Symposium on the Threshold of the 21st
Century, Cultural Publication by İzmir Metropolitan
Sipahioğlu, O. (2012). İzmir Şark Sanayi Kumpanyasi Municipality. İzmir.)
Tekstil Fabrikası’nın 1924 Yılında Karadeniz Bölgesi’nde
Yaptırdığı “Pamuk İpliği Pazarı” Araştırma Raporu. Wicke, C., Berger, S., Golombek, J. (2018). Industrial
Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Dergisi Cilt: Heritage and Regional Identities. Routledge. London.
1 Sayı: 2 (Sipahioğlu, O. (2012). Research Report on “the
Cotton Thread Market” that the Textile Factory of İzmir Xie, P., F., (2015). Industrial Heritage Tourism.
Şark Sanayi Kumpanyasi assigned to be performed in Channel View Publications.
the Black Sea Region in 1924. Journal of the Faculty of
Letters at Dokuz Eylül University, Volume: 1, Issue: 2) http://www.izmirmag.net/ Date of access: 02.04.2018.

Smith, N. (2001). Heritage of Industry: Discovering http://www.izmirdergisi.com/tr/ Date of access:
New Zealand’s Industrial History. Raupo Publishing. 10.01.2018

Smith, N. ve Williams, P. (2015). Kentin https://ege.gtb.gov.tr/kurumsal/izmir-gumrukleri-
Mutenalaştırılması. (çev. Melike Uzun). Yordam tarihcesi Date of access: 06.09.2017
Kitap. İstanbul. (Smith, N. and Williams, P. 2015.
Gentrification of the City. (Translated by Melike http://www.etnografyamuzesi.ege.edu.tr/index.html
Uzun). Yordam Kitap. İstanbul.) Date of access: 08.02.2018

Sönmez, N., Ağırbaş, S., Özbay, E. (2013). Ege http://www.dyo.com.tr/dyo/tarihce 29.11.2017
Üniversitesi Müzeleri, Koleksiyonları, Sürekli https://kentstratejileri.com/tag/turyag/ 02.03.2018
Sergileri. Ege Üniversitesi Yayınları. İzmir. (Sönmez,
N., Ağırbaş, S., Özbay, E. (2013). Museums,
Collections, and Permanent Exhibitions of Ege
University. Publications by Ege University. İzmir.)

366

ADAPTIVE REUSE OF AN INDUSTRIAL
HERITAGE IN A 21st CENTURY CITY:
SAMSUN TEKEL TOBACCO FACTORY

Fatih US1

“To conserve is to make live, not to freeze...”
Cengiz Bektaş (2001)

Abstract

Preserving industrial heritage buildings and making them usable in today’s
conditions is an important issue, especially in terms of sustainability of the cultural
heritage and its contribution to the city and settlement area. In this study, it is investigated
how the transformation of “Samsun Tekel Tobacco Factory”, which is a 19th century
industrial heritage, into “Bulvar Samsun Project” took place and how the socio-cultural
structure, production technology and architecture of the period were reflected in the 21st
century city with this transformation. For that, first of all, the points to be considered in
the protection and repair of any industrial heritage were explained. Then the architectural
features of the Samsun Tekel Tobacco Factory premises were examined and the
restoration and adaptive reuse works were explained in detail with visuals and plans.
In the transformation, positive works such as repairing and refunctioning the surviving
building materials, restoring the façades almost to their original form were determined,
and it was found out that the industrial heritage features that reflect the technologies of
the period were not preserved and reflected. In addition, it has been determined that the
cultural activity areas that will contribute to social life and tourism are not at a sufficient
level in the premises, where the commercial function is emphasized. As a result of the
study, it was understood that although it has some shortcomings, the Samsun Tekel
Tobacco Factory was restored with the least intervention and was functionalized in the
light of its location and its architectural features.

1   Assoc. Prof. Dr., Ondokuz Mayıs University, Faculty of Architecture.

e-mail: [email protected] ORCID: 0000-0003-4740-6262

367

Adaptive Reuse of an Industrial Heritage in A 21st ... Fatih US

Introduction

In the 18th century, machines took the place of human force after the technological
developments of the Industrial Revolution, which also led to the building of industrial
structures. These industrial structures became an important part of the city-life over time
and contributed much to the development of the cities. However, with the fast-growing
cities towards the end of 20th century, technological developments and the changes
in the socio-economic structure, these industrial structures lost their function or were
“marginalized”. In the 21st century, the preservation and refunctioning of idle industrial
buildings, which have lost their function in the city center, has become an important
issue to sustain cultural heritage, and to contribute to the formation of urban identity, to
maintain the social memory / urban memory and to benefit to the city and residential area.

Samsun, which is one of the most developed cities of the Black Sea Region in
terms of education, health, industry, trade, transportation and economy, has relatively few
examples of industrial heritage. TCDD Samsun Maintenance and Repair Workshop and
Samsun Tekel Tobacco Factory, which is one of the first cigarette factories in Anatolia,
are two rare industrial heritage sites in the city. Of these two buildings, which were
decided to be preserved, the maintenance workshop was restored to be converted into
the Surgical Hand Tools Museum, while the factory premises were transformed into the
Bulvar Samsun project, where many shops are concentrated.

In this study, the transformation of Samsun Tekel Tobacco Factory, an industrial
heritage from the 19th century, which remained idle for a long time, into Bulvar Samsun
project (Photo 1), and how the sociocultural structure of the period, production technology
and architecture were reflected in a 21st century city will be explained. For this, first of all,
the issues to be considered in the preservation and repair of the industrial heritage will be
investigated, and then information about the establishment, functioning, location, architectural
features of the premises, specific to the Samsun Tekel Tobacco Factory will be given, and the

Photo 1. The transformation of Samsun Tekel Tobacco Factory into Bulvar Samsun Project
Source: Bulvar Samsun Archive, Author’s Own Archive, 2013

368

Industrial Heritage in the Urban Identity and Memory Axis

restoration and reuse studies will be described with various visuals, on-site observations and
experiences. As a result, the compliance of this factory with the factors to be considered in an
industrial heritage transformation will be investigated / evaluated, changes in the new project
used for about eight years will be identified and suggestions will be presented.

Conservation and the Reuse of Industrial Heritage

Chan states that the idea of adaptation in architectural context dates back to very early
times and gives examples from times immemorial, when Roman temples were demolished
carefully and reconstituted as Christian churches (Chan, 2020). But today, the reuse of
historical structures / architectural heritage has become possible by means of conserving and
restoring the buildings, which is why these two concepts are now associated with each other.

Many scientific meetings and studies have been held or done since the 1930s
regarding the issues to be considered in the preservation and refunctioning of historical
buildings. The 5th article of the Venice Charter (1964), one of these studies that draws an
international framework, has the following recommendation regarding the refunctioning
and conservation of monuments: “The conservation of monuments is always facilitated
by making use of them for some socially useful purpose. Such use is therefore desirable
but it must not change the lay-out or decoration of the building. It is within these limits
only that modifications demanded by a change of function should be envisaged and may
be permitted.” Thus, minimum intervention is advised for the conservation and restoration
of historical structures (Tunçoku, 2004).

While carrying out architectural heritage conservation and reuse studies, it should be
aimed to reveal the aesthetic and cultural values without disturbing the original uniqueness
and identity (ICOMOS Turkey, 2013). Accordingly, each intervention is expected to reflect
the original character of the building. Old and new should be revealed honestly and it should
be complementary rather than imitative (Ahunbay, 2017; Bektaş, 2001). In addition, actors
and stakeholders should work together when making decisions regarding conservation. While
different disciplines specializing in the field of conservation, central and local governments,
conservation boards, practitioners and property owners constitute the actors of conservation;
universities, non-governmental organizations, public, users, trade associations and media
organs are among the stakeholders in terms of conservation (ICOMOS Turkey, 2013).

In the conservation of the industrial heritage, general preservation and reuse
decisions are complied with, and additional measures are taken as this heritage reflects
the production technology of the period. In the “DUBLIN Principles” published in 2011
by TICCIH (The International Committee for the Conservation of Industrial Heritage),
an international committee established to conserve industrial heritage, industrial heritage
is defined as follows: “The industrial heritage consists of sites, structures, complexes,
areas and landscapes as well as the related machinery, objects or documents that
provide evidence of past or ongoing industrial processes of production, the extraction
of raw materials and their transport infrastructures.” In the introduction part of the

369

Adaptive Reuse of an Industrial Heritage in A 21st ... Fatih US

same principles, these concepts are explained as follows: “Besides the tangible heritage
associated with industrial technology and processes, engineering, architecture and urban
planning, it includes many intangible dimensions embodied in the memories and social
life of workers and their communities.” (ICOMOS, 2011). It is clear in these definitions
that industrial heritage consists of facts that have both tangible and intangible features.

Industrial heritage reflects the pattern formed by the social, cultural, technological,
political and economic structures of the period and region in which they are located
(Köksal, 2012; Özen, Sert, 2006). Since industrial buildings need large spaces due to
their functions, they are built as structures with large and open spacing. For this reason, it
consists of high-cost buildings.

As in other historical buildings, it is recommended that industrial heritage
buildings should be preserved in their original form with minimal intervention and be
refunctionalized in accordance with the conditions of the present. In preserving the
industrial heritage, not only the buildings but also the protection of their interior equipment
should be respected (Us, 2014). Thus, not only the architectural features and culture of
the period, but also production technologies will be passed onto future generations. In
addition, by preferring public cultural and artistic uses instead of proprietary uses in new
functionalization, the impact of the industrial heritage on the city and society will expand.
The industrial heritage will also offer an impressive spatial atmosphere when reused, as
it houses the production technologies of the period and has large-span structures with
imposing machines.

Changes related to the previous and current state of the industrial heritage should be
documented and presentations, exhibitions, activities, excursions that express the meaning
of this heritage for contemporary societies should be held. Thus, the refunctioning of an
industrial structure that is completed properly in many ways can help increase the quality
of the society’s life and ensure social integration.

Samsun Tekel Tobacco Factory

Tobacco industry and tobacco trade are important factors in the development of
Samsun city. Starting from the middle of the 19th century, with the spread of tobacco
cultivation and cruises of steamships to the Black Sea, institutions related to the purchase
and management of tobacco, banks, insurance companies, consulates and schools were
founded and Samsun began to develop rapidly. At that time, French, Belgian, Russian,
Italian and American merchants added richness and vitality to the city. Some European
tobacco buyers and various raw material traders have even started to settle in the city.
This development affected the architecture of the city and caused the emergence of
architectural structures under the influence of the West (Başgelen, 1998; Mallı, 2013).
During this period, in 1887, the French Regie company established Samsun Tekel Tobacco
Factory (Photo 2), one of the first cigarette production facilities in our country (Samsun
Council of Monuments Registration Receipts) (İpek; Yılmaz, 2009; Özen, Sert, 2006; 1).

370

Industrial Heritage in the Urban Identity and Memory Axis

In the 1980 Master Development Plan, for the factory that underwent a repair
in 1950 (Mallı, 2013), it was proposed that the unimportant additions be removed
and the areas that would open up be used as parks and squares. Some of the buildings
on this street were also demolished to make room for 19 Mayıs Boulevard. With the
Conservation Master Plan that entered into force in 2000, the directorate building, the
main production facility on Gazi Street and the three warehouse buildings opposite it were
preserved. Facilities such as workplaces, dining hall and nursery in the courtyard were
also demolished (Gürkan, 2013). The surviving structures, on the other hand, have been
preserved as stores, shops, restaurants, cafes, culture and art centers. Samsun Cigarette
Factory was moved to Ballıca (quarter) in Ondokuz Mayıs district.

Photo 2. Old Photos of Samsun Tekel Tobacco Factory
Source: Bulvar Samsun Archive

The factory started production with approximately 600 workers after it was
founded (Photo 3). The factory workers consisted of male and female Tekel workers
with their gray aprons. At that time, almost everyone in the city had an acquaintance
working in this factory. In the years when tobacco exports were intense in Samsun, the
tobacco market opened in May and the city’s economy revived in accord with the recently
determined prices, and weddings and social activities took place accordingly.

Photo 3. Old interior photos of Samsun Tekel Tobacco Factory
Source: The Architect’s (Fatih Kesgün) Archive

371

Adaptive Reuse of an Industrial Heritage in A 21st ... Fatih US

Location of buildings and unique architectural features

Since Samsun Tekel Tobacco Factory is located in the city center, it is in a
location that is constantly passed by and monitored. Situated in the center of the city
and settled on an area of ​2​ 3.000 square meters, the factory premises have Sosyal
Sigortalar commercial building and Cumhuriyet Square to its north, Merkez Site
Mosque, Samsun Tax Office and central bazaar to its south, military housing to its
east and Samsun Cultural Directorate to its west (Figure 1). Among these, Cumhuriyet
Square is the most important meeting place of the city where various events are
held. Located on 19 Mayıs Boulevard, the premises are close to the city’s trade and
transportation network. In addition, there are various buildings around it, such as
educational, cultural, commercial, military, religious and public structures. In this
regard, Samsun Tekel Tobacco Factory is at the center of the economic, social and
cultural life of the city.

Figure 1. Samsun Tekel Tobacco Factory, layout plan
Source: Sert, 2004

Factory, which shows international architectural features, is one of the buildings
where rationality and practicality are in the forefront due to its function, like other
examples of its period. The factory, whose architect is unknown, consists of buildings
belonging to the French period. The building in the premises was located in a way that
would enable having the production block in the middle, and the building was designed to
have spacious courtyards for the workers. Due to limitations of the construction systems
of the period, the structure does not have wide spacings without columns, unlike current
factory buildings. Cigarette production and storage areas are designed as large spaces
with high ceilings and colonnades. On the façades, there are arched and rectangular /
square-shaped doors and windows. The structures were built with reinforced concrete and

372

Industrial Heritage in the Urban Identity and Memory Axis

masonry construction systems. The external walls of the masonry buildings are covered
with concrete, stone bricks and metal plates; the floors and ceilings are covered with
wood, and the roof is covered with fireproof materials such as tile, slate, eternit or metal
plates. The floor covering, doors and windows of all buildings are wooden, the stairs are
reinforced concrete, and the roofs are Marseille-type tiles. There is no specific heating,
ventilation and lighting system planned. (Özen, Sert, 2006; Mesci, Işıktan, 2011)

Samsun Tekel Tobacco Factory Premises consist of buildings with cigarette
production, warehouse, offices, nursery, dining hall and security functions. Since another
building belonging to the Provincial Directorate of Culture and Tourism is added in the
transformation project, the buildings are examined in a total of 7 blocks (A-B-C-D-E-
F-G) in this study.

Block A (Figure 2), located in the east direction on Gazi Street and constituting
the most important part of the premises, is the building where cigarettes are produced.
The floor plans of the colonnaded three-floor building consist of 3 parts which are almost
the same, and one can pass from one floor to another via 2 staircases or via an elevator.
In block B, adjacent to the east of block A, there were mainly offices, a dining hall,
a nursery, cigarette production unit and security units. The main entrance of the block
is from the gate with two doors in the south. One can enter and exit the buildings via
the doors in the courtyard. Two-storey buildings are aligned around an inner courtyard.
Connections between the floors are by the stairs inside the building and in the courtyard.
It is possible to pass from block A to block B and vice-versa via the 1st floor.

Block C (Figure 3), located in the west of Gazi Street, was used as a tobacco warehouse.
It has two entrances on the east and north façades. All floors of the four-storey building have a
monolithic plan crossed with columns without dividing walls. Two staircases located near the
building entrances link the two floors. Block D, located in the southwest of block C, was used

Figure 2. Samsun Tekel Tobacco Factory, blocks A-B ground floor plan, first floor plan, second floor plan
Source: Sert, 2004

373

Adaptive Reuse of an Industrial Heritage in A 21st ... Fatih US

Figure 3. Samsun Tekel Tobacco blocks C-D ground floor plan
Source: Sert, 2004

as a tobacco warehouse like block C. The block has only one entrance and it is located on the
east façade. The ground floor of the four-storey building consists of two parts, while the upper
floors consist of a monolithic plan crossed by columns. Two symmetrically placed stairs link
the floors in this block. The building located between block C and block D stands as the passage
between the two blocks. Block E, which is used as a tobacco warehouse, is located at the
intersection of Gazi Street and Orhaniye Street. The trapezoid-shaped building consists of five
floors. The floors of this block whose main entrance is to the west, was designed in a monolithic
plan. Passage between floors is by a single-arm staircase (Sert, 2004; Özen, Sert, 2006).

Block F, which is used as the Tekel chief directorate building, is at the intersection of 19
Mayıs Boulevard and Mevlevihane Street. While the factory was idle, its courtyard was used as
a parking lot and this block was also used as the management of that parking lot.

Block G, which is outside the premises of Samsun Tekel Tobacco Factory, was
included in the renovation project and was formerly used as the Provincial Directorate
of Culture and Tourism. This block has undergone many changes in function since its
construction. After it was built in 1890, it was first used as the Polihron Hotel, then served

374

Industrial Heritage in the Urban Identity and Memory Axis

as the Samsun Courthouse between 1930 and 1940 and was finally used as a military
hospital (Sarisakal).

The Transformation of “Samsun Tekel Tobacco Factory” into
“Bulvar Samsun” Project and its Use in the 21st Century City

Samsun Tekel Tobacco Factory, which was built in 1887, closed its doors in 1994 and
then reopened in 2012 with facilities like stores, shops, cafes and restaurants. While it was
closed, it remained empty and was neglected. The buildings and the premises registered in
the Conservation Master Plan were declared as a renovation area in 2006 with the decision
of the Council of Ministers. In 2009, it was leased to Joint Venture Group of Torunlar and
Turkmall for 30 years in the tender opened by Samsun Metropolitan Municipality. In
2012, it was transformed into Bulvar Samsun project (Photo 4, 5) which includes stores,
shops, restaurants, cafes, a culture and art center, offices and open seating areas.

The Samsun Local History Group, the Chamber of Architects and the Samsun
Metropolitan Mayor of the period, Yusuf Ziya Yılmaz took interest in the transformation
project. Samsun Local History Group (SYTG) organized a panel and a photography

Photo 4. The transformation of Samsun Tekel Tobacco Factory into Bulvar Samsun Project
Source: Author’s own archive, 2010, 2013

Photo 5. The transformation of Samsun Tekel Tobacco Factory into Bulvar Samsun Project
Source: Author’s own archive, 2010, 2013

375

Adaptive Reuse of an Industrial Heritage in A 21st ... Fatih US

exhibition in order to attract public attention to the subject and even published these
works in a booklet. The proposal of the group at that time was to preserve historical
buildings and transform them into a cultural center (SYTG, 2013). However, as a result
of the meetings held by the Samsun Branch of the Chamber of Architects and the project
group, a transformation decision was taken, which dictated no additional structure for
commercial functions.

The building survey, restitution, restoration and renovation projects in the
transformation process of the project were prepared by Mim Construction & Architecture
with architect Fatih Kesgün as the project owner, and the application projects were
prepared in cooperation with Mim Construction & Architecture and Cem Architecture.
Construction started in 2011 (Photo 6) and the building started operating in June 2012
after a short period of 14 months (Us, 2014).

Photo 6. Construction process and restoration works
Source: The architect’s (Fatih Kesgün) archive
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWnb_cBvSIQ

With this transformation, Bulvar Samsun has been awarded many national and
international awards. At the ICSC European Shopping Center Awards 2013 Winners,
the project was awarded “Special Distinction: Regeneration Award” and the “New
Developments: Medium, Commendation Award” in its own category (2). Bulvar
Samsun was also considered worthy of the “Best Shopping Center” award at the
“ArkiPARC Real Estate Awards” organized annually by Arkitera Architecture Center
(1; 3).

Necessary physical and mechanical tests were carried out during the restoration
process of the project, and then the shotcrete method, that is the concrete method
applied with compressed air, was used as a strengthening technique on all walls.
Only trimming, repairing, plastering and painting processes were done on the façades
and the roofs were rebuilt with steel construction (Mesci, Işıktan, 2011; Kesgün,
2013). The existing materials of the building were reused after they were cleaned and
repaired. For example, marseille-type tiles were cleaned one by one and put in their
previous places (Photo 7). All façades of the buildings have been restored in their
original form as much as possible.

376

Industrial Heritage in the Urban Identity and Memory Axis

Photo 7. Cleaning of Marseille type tiles
Source: The architect’s (Fatih Kesgün) archive
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWnb_cBvSIQ

The premises, consisting of 6 blocks while being used as a factory, now has 7
blocks with an addition of the building of Provincial Culture and Tourism Directorate
which was included during the transformation into Bulvar Samsun project (Figure 4).
Block A has stores, shops, conference halls and offices; block B has restaurants, cafes and
bookstores; blocks C, D and E have stores and shops; block F has restaurants and cafes
and block G has, again, stores and shops (Figure 5, 6, 7). The total area of 1​​ 9.000 m2 is
planned to be used as 15.100 m2 retail, 2.600 m2 restaurant-cafe, 1.000 m2 office, 300 m2
culture and exhibition. In addition, a 650-vehicle indoor car park has also been planned
(Kesgün, 2013). Although there were minor changes in these numbers later on, the entire
premises continued to function as a commercial space.

Figure 4. Bulvar Samsun Project, layout plan
Source: The architect’s (Fatih Kesgün) archive

377

Adaptive Reuse of an Industrial Heritage in A 21st ... Fatih US

Figure 5. Bulvar Samsun Project, ground floor plan
Source: The architect’s (Fatih Kesgün) archive

Figure 6. Bulvar Samsun Project, first floor plan
Source: The architect’s (Fatih Kesgün) archive
378

Industrial Heritage in the Urban Identity and Memory Axis

Figure 7. Bulvar Samsun Project, second floor plan
Source: The architect’s (Fatih Kesgün) archive

While the first two floors of block A are generally used as stores and shops, a part
of the ground floor in the northern part and facing the square is used as a cafe. On the third
floor, there is a conference hall, culture and art venues (Photo 8) and offices. The large
colonnaded spaces in this block, which originally functioned as the cigarette production
section, are separated by dividing walls for their new functions. Since vastness is crucial
in store designs, the windows of the first floors are mostly closed off.

Photo 8. Bulvar Samsun Project, block A, conference hall, cultural and art center
Source: Author’s own archive, 2013

379

Adaptive Reuse of an Industrial Heritage in A 21st ... Fatih US

Both floors of block B, which is located around a courtyard, have a restaurant
and cafe function (Photo 9). However, when the premises started functioning, the part
to the north of the ground floor was used as a bookstore. In addition, the section south
of the first floor, which was originally used as a cafe-restaurant, is now used as a game /
entertainment center. An escalator and an elevator have been added to provide access to
this section. Semi-open seating areas were planned for the courtyard and the trees there
have been taken under protection.

Photo 9. Bulvar Samsun Project, block B, courtyard, restaurant and cafe
Source: Author’s own archive, 2013

There are small and large-scale stores and shops in blocks C, D, E and G. Blocks
C and D, which have monolithic plans, are divided into spaces of different sizes by
dividing walls. The section between blocks C and D (Photo 10) was considered as a
different entrance for the stores. This intermediate section was built using contemporary

Photo 10. Bulvar Samsun Project, the section between blocks C and D
Source: Author’s own archive, 2013, 2021

380

Industrial Heritage in the Urban Identity and Memory Axis

architectural elements like glass and steel, but today this entrance has been closed and
has become unusable. Some of the windows of the upper floors were cut in half due to
suspended ceilings or due to space designs with various ceiling heights, and some were
closed to earn more room (Photo 11). A similar application has been made in blocks E and
G; as they are used as a store or shop, the upper floor window openings have been usually
closed off from the inside.

Photo 11. Bulvar Samsun Project, block C, shops
Source: Author’s own archive, 2013

Block F (Photo 12), which was used as the Head Directorate building, is now
functioning as a restaurant-cafe. This building, which was transformed with the least
intervention, is the complement of the premises.

Photo 12. Bulvar Samsun Project, block F, restaurant - cafe 381
Source: Author’s own archive, 2021

Adaptive Reuse of an Industrial Heritage in A 21st ... Fatih US

Awnings are placed on the upper parts of the windows and doors on the façades
of blocks A, B, C and E for preventing sunlight and for decorative purposes. Lighting
elements are designed on the façades of the same blocks. Street lightings are hung from
the decorations between the two blocks on Gazi Street (Photo 13).

Photo 13. Bulvar Samsun Project, transformation of Gazi Street
Source: Author’s own archive, 2010, 2021

Vehicle traffic on Gazi Street was directed towards right after Osmaniye Street, preventing
vehicles from entering the factory premises. Thus, the pedestrian flow is not intervened, and
various social and cultural activities can be carried out on Gazi Street and open areas.

Photo 14. Bulvar Samsun Project, square and sculpture
Source: Author’s own archive, 2021

There is a sculpture, an ornamental pool, stairs, seating units and elevators and
lifts connecting to the parking lot in the square (Photo 14). The statue in the middle of the
square is designed to express gratitude to the laborers who have worked in this factory
for years and contributed to the country’s economy. The sculpture, made by the sculptor
Hakan Karakaya, symbolizes both the tobacco leaf and the working woman and man

382

Industrial Heritage in the Urban Identity and Memory Axis

shoulder to shoulder (1). In recent years, some additions have been made to the square:
promotion and sales kiosks, play / entertainment platforms and toys for children.

Discussion and Conclusions

In this study, the establishment, location, architectural features, restoration,
transformation of Samsun Tekel Tobacco Factory, which was built in the last quarter of
the 19th century and remained idle for 18 years, into Samsun Bulvar Project and how it
is used in the 21st century city of Samsun, was explained. In this section, evaluations are
made on how faithful this process was to the issues to be considered in the conservation
and reuse of an industrial heritage.

The transformation of the buildings in the Samsun Tekel Tobacco Factory
premises has been done faithfully to the original state of the buildings. Building
materials that survived to the present day were cleaned, repaired and reused. Thus,
some of the tangible architectural features of an industrial heritage were preserved in
this transformation.

Since the interiors of restaurants and cafes were functionalized preserving the
original state of the building, unlike stores and shops, visitors can find the opportunity
to sit, spend time and eat and drink in a historical place of that city.

The statue placed in the middle of the square, which represents the laborers
working in the factory, addresses the previous use of the building. Thus, it makes a
positive contribution to the intangible elements of the city’s urban memory.

The artistic and cultural venues on the top floor of block A and the square
where various activities can be held contribute to the social and cultural life of the city.
Activities, social responsibility projects can be carried out on national and religious
holidays in the square.

The stores, shops, restaurants, cafes, offices, culture and exhibition areas opened
with the transformation revive the social and commercial dynamics of the city and
contribute to the residential area in economic, cultural and social aspects.

The transformation of Samsun Tekel Tobacco Factory into Bulvar Samsun project
also has negative effects on the urban memory of the city. One of them is “Samsun Reji
Tekel Fabrikaları Turizm ve Ticaret Merkezi” (Samsun Regie Tekel Factories Tourism
and Trade Center). In this name, especially the name “Regie” was asked to be preserved
and passed onto future generations. The reason for this was that people could remember
how the foreign organization called Regie held the tobacco monopoly and that thousands
of smugglers, rangers and police officers were killed in order to protect this monopoly
(Gürkan, 2013). Thus, a reminder of the transformation of foreign capital into a tool of
exploitation and what this could do to society, would survive. A new name for the heritage
can still be considered or the public’s opinion can be asked.

383

Adaptive Reuse of an Industrial Heritage in A 21st ... Fatih US

As a result of the transformation, it is seen that production technologies,
which are an industrial heritage, are not conserved and reflected. A space can be
considered where the cigarette production machines related to this can be exhibited.
In this space, articles, photographs and objects explaining the old functions of the
buildings, which can be seen by everyone passing through the premises, can be
exhibited for urban memory and cultural sustainability. Thus, both the tangible and
intangible heritage of the industrial structure is preserved and displayed.

Large spaces such as blocks A, C and D where cigarette production and
storage were carried out have been divided into stores and shops, and thus the spatial
wholeness has become imperceptible. Giving new functions suitable for this size
will be more accurate to percept the wholeness of the space.

Unfortunately, only a few stores and shops can give the feeling of shopping
in a historical place. Usually, the original materials in the interiors are covered with
contemporary building materials. Therefore, in many stores and shops one feels like
being in a modern building rather than a historical building.

As blocks A, C, D, E and G are used by stores and shops, most of the windows
of the upper floors are closed off. Some of the windows are not visible due to various
interior designs and suspended ceilings. Some windows were also closed off in order
to earn more room. These windows have a vacant and dark look from outside.

The section between the blocks C and D was built to create an entrance with
modern materials such as steel and glass, but today this entrance is closed. Although
it is a positive approach to make a modern addition to a historical building, the
approach could not succeed in reality.

In the area starting from the front of the Samsun Tobacco Factory and
extending to the pier, a rail system similar to the storages that existed in the past
and the decoil line used in tobacco transportation can be built. Thus, the residents
of Samsun and the tourists visiting the city can experience a past time experience
(Mallı, 2013).

It is seen that the cultural activity areas that can contribute to social life and
tourism are not at a sufficient level in the premises while the focus is more on
commercial use. Therefore, some of the existing spaces can be transformed into
cultural and artistic functions. Especially in the square arrangement, a meeting-event
area can be designed where people can meet and participate in various activities. In
addition, as there is an area with firm ground like Cumhuriyet Square to the right of
the premises, more greening and afforestation can be done in the square.

As a result of the study, it was observed that although it had some deficiencies
as described above, the industrial structure examined was restored with the least
intervention and was presented to the benefit of the city and its people by functioning
in accord with the location and the architectural features of the settlement. The

384

Industrial Heritage in the Urban Identity and Memory Axis

building can be re-evaluated and refunctioned in the contexts of the sustainability
of the cultural heritage, its contribution to 1) the urban identity, 2) the continuity
of social and urban memory, and 3) the city where it is located, and the settlement
area. Consequently, it is thought that arrangements that reflect the industrial heritage
characteristics of the premises, and therefore the production technologies, social,
economic and political structure of the period in which it was built, can be made in
line with the views of architects, designers, scientists and the public.

385

Adaptive Reuse of an Industrial Heritage in A 21st ... Fatih US

References Samsun Anıtlar Kurulu, Tescil Fişleri, Dosya No: 55-
00/190.
Ahunbay, Z. (2017). Tarihi Çevre Koruma ve
Restorasyon, 9. Baskı, YEM Yayın, İstanbul. Samsun Yerel Tarih Grubu (SYTG), (2013).
Fabrikanın Zilleri Sustu, Adı Kaldı REJİ, Samsun
Başgelen, N. (1998). Bir Zamanlar Samsun, Arkeoloji Yerel Tarih Grubu Yayınları, (pp. 4). Samsun.
ve Sanat Yayınları, Kentbank.
Sert, A. (2004). “Endüstri Binaları’nın Yeniden
Bektaş, C. (2001). Koruma Onarım, Literatür Yayınları, İşlevlendirilmesi: Karadeniz Bölgesi Tekel
(pp. 23). İstanbul. Binaları’nın Analizi ve Yeni İşlev Önerileri”, KTÜ
FBE, unpublished master›s thesis, Trabzon.
Chan, H. (2020). “Buildings are not lifeless objects, it’s
time to treat them as such” Tunçoku, S. S. (2004). “Günümüzde Koruma /
Restorasyon Çıkmazı”, Mimarlık, Sayı: 315, (pp. 56-
https://www.thefifthestate.com.au/articles/buildings- 59).
are-not-lifeless-objects-its-time-to-treat-them-as-such/
Us, F. (2014). “Bir 19. Yüzyıl Endüstri Mirasının
Gürkan, H. (2013). Tarihsel Mirasın Kent Kültürüne Yeniden Kullanımı: Samsun Tekel Tütün
Kazandırılmasında Reji Örneği, Fabrikanın Zilleri Fabrikası’nın Bulvar Samsun Projesi’ne Dönüşümü,
Sustu, Adı Kaldı REJİ, Samsun Yerel Tarih Grubu Mimarlık Dergisi, Mimarlar Odası, issue: 377, (pp.
Yayınları, (pp. 36-38). Samsun. 57-64).

ICOMOS Türkiye (2013), Finalized with the national 1. https://www.bulvarsamsun.com.tr/hakkimizda/
architectural conservation experts meeting held
between 30th May 2012-17 March 2013 and the 2. https://europe-re.com/icsc-europe-announces-
revision of National Committee of ICOMOS Turkey. winners-of-2013-european-shopping-centre-awards-
eu/1885
ICOMOS, (2011). Joint ICOMOS – TICCIH
Principles for the Conservation of Industrial Heritage 3. https://www.arkitera.com/haber/bulvar-samsun-
Sites, Structures, Areas and Landscapes, DUBLIN avmye-en-iyi-alisveris-merkezi-odulu/
Principles.

İpek, N. Yılmaz, C. (2009). Geçmişten Geleceğe
Samsun Albümü Osmanlı Dönemi, Samsun
Büyükşehir Belediyesi Kültür ve Sosyal İşler Dairesi
Başkanlığı, (pp. 77). Samsun.

Kesgün, F. (2013). Samsun Bulvar Project, The
Architect’s Archive

Köksal, G. (2012). “Endüstri Mirasını Koruma ve
Yeniden Kullanım Yaklaşımı”, Güney Mimarlık, issue:
8, (pp. 18-23)

Mallı, M. (2013). Reji ve Samsun Geçmişi - Geleceği,
Fabrikanın Zilleri Sustu, Adı Kaldı REJİ, Samsun Yerel
Tarih Grubu Yayınları, (pp. 56-67). Samsun.

Mesci, B. Işıtan, T. (2011). “Tarihi Yapıların
Restorasyonunda Malzeme Seçiminin Önemi: Samsun
Örneği”, Samsun Sempozyumu 2011.

Özen, Hamiyet, Sert, Arzu, (2006), “Karadeniz’de
Unutulan Endüstri Mirası”, Gazi Üniversitesi
Mühendislik Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi, volume: 21,
issue: 3, (pp. 499-508).

386

URBAN AMNESIA AND INDUSTRIAL
HERITAGE IN ANTALYA

Emine BARBAROS AKAY1 - Hilal Tuğba ÖRMECİOĞLU2 - Aslı ER AKAN3

Abstract

The industrial revolution had been the most powerful agent of urbanization since
the late 19th century. It had been the reason for the foundation of some of the cities, while
the stimulator of macro form for many others. In this way, industry left traces in the
contemporary urban space some of which were distinct, others implicit. Although the
conservation of industrial heritage is a relatively new concept; it is easier to convince
these distinct traces to be protected in a city that is still industrial, or has its industrial
past in collective memory such as Kayseri, Istanbul, Bursa, etc. Nevertheless, it is also
important to reveal implicit traces and protect the remaining in a city that has a forgotten
past of industrialization like Antalya.

Antalya, which is known as a center of tourism for the last 50 years, had an unknown
history of industrialization attempts from the late 19th to mids of the 20th century that includes
mining, textile, and hydro-powered agricultural industry. However, these left few visible
traces on urban memory due to rapid urbanization and mass migration that most of the citizens
are unaware of. Despite this urban amnesia, this paper aims to reveal these implicit traces of
industrialization attempts and show their long-lasting physical and cultural effects on urban
identity, macro form, and collective memory such as names, roads, places, etc.

1   Master’s degree, Antalya Regional Council for the Conservation of Cultural Property.

e-mail: [email protected] ORCID: 0000-0003-4210-3342

2   Assoc. Prof., Department of Architecture, Akdeniz University Faculty of Architecture.

e-mail: [email protected] ORCID: 0000-0002-0662-4178

3   Assoc. Prof., Department of Architecture, Cankaya University Faculty of Architecture.

e-mail: [email protected] ORCID: 0000-0001-5362-8625

387

Urban Amnesia and Industrial ... Emine BARBAROS AKAY - Hilal Tuğba ÖRMECİOĞLU - Aslı ER AKAN

Industrial Revolution as Agent of Urbanization Since 19th
Century

Cities have had a definite, measurable and stable structure from their first
emergence until the industrial revolution. With the emergence of the industrial revolution,
the concept of “city” has entered a period of rapid change and transformation in functional
and structural terms. The change in the means of production due to the technical
developments in the industrial age caused radical changes in the social, economic, and
physical environment. The developments in means of transportation and replacement
of manpower in the production process by machinery initiated the migration movement
from rural to urban areas and led to the birth of modern cities.

In order to understand the effects of the Industrial Revolution on the city, firstly
Europe, the birthplace of revolution should be examined. As Leonardo Benevolo (2006)
conveyed, Europe is the product of political, economic, and cultural events that span
over ten centuries and which itself is linked by a complex system of mutual causality.
With many of these events becoming revolutionary at the end of the 18th century, Europe
crossed a sensitive threshold and began to transform.

Benevolo (2006) discusses the factors of this change affecting the architecture of
the period under four headings as “the increase in the population of the city due to the
change in the modes and amount of production; benefiting from scientific developments in
technology production with the increasing importance of reason, science, and mathematics;
the rapid growth and change of cities with the disappearance of legal practices and other
mechanisms mediating between the individual and the state in construction activities; and
finally the need for the reorganization of infrastructure ”.

As Benevolo stated, the most important factor affecting the urban organization and
leading to the production of urban policies is the sudden increase of population in urban
areas. With the Industrial Revolution, the colonies turned into a source of raw materials,
and the rural population turned into a source of cheap labor for industrial production.
People living in rural areas and earn their lives with agricultural production or home
production had to either work for a wage in rural areas or migrate to cities with the
realization of capitalist modes of production and the widespread mechanization in the
agricultural sector. This led to the formation of a new class that earns their life by selling
their labor for a wage.

The working class, which Pamuk (1994) defined as the “dispossessed labor army”,
began to shelter around industrial production areas, hence workers’ neighborhoods were
formed in these areas in a rapid and unhygienic manner. This rapid increase in the urban
population forced the birth of modern urbanization.

In the first half of the 18th century, England was a rural country where even industrial
buildings were established in the countryside. In the early periods of industrialism, heavy
industrial facilities are located in the forest area due to the processing of the iron mine

388

Industrial Heritage in the Urban Identity and Memory Axis

with charcoal. On the other hand, in the textile industry, which has less dependence
on raw materials spatially, home production is dominant, that agricultural production
and weaving activities are carried out together. With the beginning of the processing
of iron with coal, industrial facilities began to be established in mining areas. With the
emergence of Watt’s steam engine patented in 1769 and replacing hydraulic power, the
industry has become elsewhere. These developments, which provided great freedom to
the industrialists, triggered the development of new cities or the immense population
growth on the edge of the existing city (Benevolo, 2006). Hence, the industry, which
had a decentralized and dispersed structure until the 19th century in England, started to
become centralized

Mumford (2007) in his book “City in History”, defines the main elements of the
industrial city as factory, railway, and suburb. In this newly formed urban model, the
term “city” corresponds to the fact that more than two thousand people come together
in one area, which will require giving a special name. Now, the city can grow without
the qualities such as being the creator of social relations and interaction and ensuring the
sustainability of social accumulation that characterize a developed city. In this new model,
the city meets a structure consisting of oddly shaped fragmented lands with meaningless
streets and boulevards built in the place leftover from factories, railways, loading stations,
and garbage hills.

Changes in the transportation network, especially the railway, have become an
important factor in determining the character of the city and drawing its borders. The
introduction of railways to the center of the city and the establishment of railyards (loading
and maneuvering stations) in the most valuable places caused the natural arteries of the
city to be divided, and transitions between the formed parts of the city to be difficult. The
waste of space made by the railyards installed in the city center caused the city to expand
further outward (Mumford, 2007).

With the production of new transportation vehicles, the mass transportation
movement had been initiated; accordingly, the city has no longer been a pedestrian city.
Besides, the ineffectiveness of management and planning in determining the character
of the urban area driven by rapid population growth, industrialization, and economic
growth, the failure of laws and rules have created housing and infrastructure problems,
pollution, noise, epidemic diseases, and heavy working conditions in these regions.

In general, the industrial cities of the period can be described as unsanitary
cities with inadequate and poor housing conditions and infrastructure deficiencies.
These problems forced 19th-century intellectuals to reflect on human needs and urban
possibilities. Recognizing this urban crisis, reformers tried to find solutions to certain
problems through bureaucratic means, while socialist theorists criticized it and the liberal
society that produced this urban mess, and proposed ideal city models to be realized away
from existing cities.

The transformative power of the modernization movement has altered the urban
fabric in which these structures are located along with the production spaces. The city

389

Urban Amnesia and Industrial ... Emine BARBAROS AKAY - Hilal Tuğba ÖRMECİOĞLU - Aslı ER AKAN

was tried to be reorganized by people who aimed to find a solution to the problems of the
industrial city. Benevolo (1981) mentions that modern urbanism was born at this time,
particularly in the twenty-year period between 1830 and 1850. Since the old methods are
no longer useful in solving the problems of the industrial city that grows unplanned and
uncontrolled, new intervention methods have been sought.

Benevolo (1981) explains why the city needs to be reorganized by mentioning
the characteristics of the industrial cities of the period. The state could not keep up with
the pace of the buildings built to meet the housing needs of the increasing population;
that administrative bodies and organizations lost their effectiveness. Public authorities
had no more control over the citizens. Construction activities in the cities have come
under the control of speculative movements. The crowd, unsanitary conditions, and
lack of infrastructure started to threaten the public health in workers’ neighborhoods. It
has emerged that the individual solutions of the citizens will not be sufficient in order
to eliminate the problems that arise, and a solution with general validity by the public
authority has emerged. Thus, the search for scientific solutions to the problems of the
industrial city formed the basis of modern urban planning, which Tekeli (2009) defined
as a “modernist project”.

Benevolo (1981) describes the original sources of modern urbanism on the
following two phenomena: The compelling nature of new technical developments,
especially the railway, and the precautions proposed to solve the resulting health problems.
In order to establish the railway network, the relationship of the railway with the urban
and rural environment had to be reorganized; while, the first sanitary laws were created
to respond to health problems. Although the actions of reformers at first aimed to take
precautions in some issues such as the lack of infrastructure and potable water, the spread
of communicable diseases, new problems have gradually added to these problems. The
reform movements made in this process could not develop a holistic system covering the
whole urban organism due to the lack of urban planning ideas.

Various habitats of the working class, which emerged with the Industrial
Revolution, showed common features in terms of their deleterious physical conditions.
The epidemic diseases that emerged as a result of poverty, hunger, unsanitary habitats,
and heavy working conditions shortened life expectancy and caused inefficiency in
production. In this process, precautions to meet the basic needs of the working class
have begun to be taken by the owners of the capital in order to prevent interruption of
production and increase productivity. In addition to the rearrangement of sanitary laws,
the dwellings where the labor class inhabited were rearranged in line with needs. In this
process, the concept of industrial campuses containing housing and social facilities along
with factories has developed. This was a modern approach that eventually aimed a create
a planned industrial city.

The first examples of industrial campuses that are handled with a holistic approach
are seen in England and America in the middle of the 19th century. Roth (2000) states that
the first example of this approach is the Saltaire Textile Factory, which was established in

390

Industrial Heritage in the Urban Identity and Memory Axis

1852 by Titus Salt in Bradford, England for a population of 4000 inhabitants. The garden
houses on the campus were built around the factory in order to increase the peace and
comfort conditions of the labor and to prevent unhealthy conditions. Besides, there are
educational and healthcare facilities along with recreation areas on the campus.

In summary, it is seen that the rational and systematic solution tools of modernism
are used in the planning of industrial settlements, which have been established since the
middle of the 19th century, to ensure the continuity and efficiency of the workforce and
production spaces. In industrial cities, not only the working conditions and environments
of labor but also the hours and places spent outside of working hours were regulated.

The idea of designing the extracurricular life of the labor class within the industrial
campuses has also affected the spatial development of cities. New settlements have
emerged outside of the city centers; and infrastructure, transportation, and social services
were provided to these regions in a planned manner. A similar planning approach was
applied also in the Early Republican era across the industrial campuses built.

Industrial Development in Late Ottoman &
Early Republican Periods

The industrialization and modernization movement in the 19th century affected
the Ottoman Empire along with many other monarchies and led to series of events that
enabled the construction of a modern nation-state in Anatolia. The Republic of Turkey
since its establishment has developed policies on new economic and social order by
importing Western technologies and institutions to reach the level of industrialized
modernity (Tekeli, 1971).

In the 15th and 16th centuries, the Ottoman Empire was a country with a small-
scale industry where production was made by hand or with simple tools. During this
period, industrial activities generally concentrated on cotton weaving, leatherworking,
mining, and woodworking and were carried out for domestic market needs; surplus
production was exported to Western countries (Kıraç 2001). Production was carried out
by state-controlled guilds; businesses other than factories producing for the government
or military were mostly small facilities with 30-40 workers (Toprak, 1985).

Since the 17th century, the commercial, military, political, economic, and social
changes in the Ottoman Empire and their interaction with each other caused the Empire to
change (Kıraç, 2001). The loss of the integrity of the industrial sector, the change of world
trade routes, the difficulties caused by prolonged wars and migration to the city center
had triggered a new transformation (Türkdoğan, 1981). The Ottoman administration tried
to find solutions to the problems it faced in the political, economic, and social fields with
reforms that altered the traditional structure. The first regulations have been made in the
field of trade for securing the property, removing the remaining control over production
from the pre-industrial era; in the field of education, for sending students abroad,

391

Urban Amnesia and Industrial ... Emine BARBAROS AKAY - Hilal Tuğba ÖRMECİOĞLU - Aslı ER AKAN

spreading modern educational institutions; and in the field of administration, making
institutional changes in administrative bodies (Tekeli, 2009). Although all these attempts
had an impact on the transformation of the empire to some extent, industrialization and
modernization similar to the one experienced in Europe could not be fully realized in the
Ottoman Empire.

Industrial developments in the Ottoman Empire in the 19th century can be
examined under two periods. Önsoy (1988) defines the period between 1840-1860
as the first period and the period between 1860-1876 as the second period. The
first period is the period when industrial facilities were established and existing
factories began to be modernized in order to ensure the production of goods needed
by the state. These structures were mostly built in and around Istanbul. Since the
1840s, an “industrial park” containing industrial facilities was established on the
15 km coastline between the Yedikule and Küçükçekmece within the scope of the
industrial program supported by the Ottoman government. Within the industrial
park, there is an iron foundry, machine shop, yarn twisting, weaving workshops,
printing house, and shipyard (Clark, 1974). During this period, factories were also
established around Istanbul. Among these, the best known are the weaving factories
in Hereke and Izmit, the silk spinning factory in Bursa, and the wool fabric factory
in Balıkesir.

In the second period, efforts were made to strengthen small-scale enterprises
and craftsmen. In 1866, the Reformation of Industry Commission (Islah-ı Sanayi
Komisyonu) was established. The Commission worked on increasing customs
tariff, establishing companies by the unification of producers, opening industrial
schools, and promoting them to the public; and achieved these goals except for the
increase in customs tariff rates (Kıraç, 2001). Factories established in this period
were generally established with domestic and foreign capital partnerships (Pamuk,
1997).

Although three-quarters of the industrial enterprises in this period were
weaving factories (Ökçün, 1997), there were other prominent industrial plants such
as the glass manufacturing plant in Paşabahçe, the tobacco factory in Cibali, the
paper mill in Beykoz, the match factory in Küçükçekmece, the Bomonti brewery,
and gashouses in Yedikule and Kadıköy.

A statistical study was carried out to determine the industrial facilities in
the Ottoman lands between 1913-1915. The study includes workplaces employing
at least 10 workers and mills producing at least 100 quintal grains in 24 hours.
The number of factories included in the report was 252 and 264 between 1913
and 1915, respectively (Ökçün, 1997). According to this report, the places where
industrialization is intense were Istanbul and Izmir; except for the four spinning
mills in Adana and Tarsus and the flour mills in some cities, there were no industrial
facilities at this scale in most Anatolian cities.

392

Industrial Heritage in the Urban Identity and Memory Axis

Although the Ottoman industry was encouraged with the declaration of
constitutional monarchy and laws enacted between 1909 and 1913, these efforts were
negatively affected by the outbreak of the First World War in 1914. Although most of
the industrial facilities built during this period were not completed and could not start
production; among the buildings built during this period, the electricity factory in
Silahtarağa and the slaughterhouse in Sütlüce stand out (Ökçün, 1997).

After the proclamation of the Republic in 1923, a comprehensive reform process
began for the modernization of the state. This process was a continuation of the reform
movements that had started in the Ottoman Empire in the 19th century, but with its scope
and radicalism, it was separated from the previous period and gained a revolutionary
character. Bozdoğan (2002) argues that Republican modernization is not in a structure
that develops from bottom to top as it is in the West. On the contrary, it was developed
within the framework of a top-down political and ideological program implemented by
the reformist elites of the state, similar to the majority of other non-Western contexts.
So indeed, the Republican regime adopted industrialization as a tool of economic
independence and development; and most of the industrial ventures in the early republican
period were financed directly or indirectly by the state.

For this purpose, banks and various institutions have been established by the
state. Established in 1924, İşbank played an active role in the integration of domestic
and foreign capital with political power (Boratav, 2004). Sanayi ve Maadin Bank was
also established in 1925 to provide industrial loans to the private sector and to operate
the factories from the Ottoman Empire. In addition to these, with the Encouragement of
Industry Law (Teşvik-i Sanayi Kanunu) enacted in 1927, it was tried to accelerate the
accumulation of capital and the development of the industry (Aslanoğlu, 2010).

After the 1929 economic crisis, upon understanding that the private enterprise is
inadequate and economic planning is necessary, the state started to make development
plans and directly participate in many productive sectors (Boratav 2004). Under these
circumstances, big-scale state enterprises such as Sümerbank in 1933 and Etibank in
1935 were founded. Fifteen factories were founded mostly in peripheral cities of Anatolia
during the implementation of the First Five-Year Development Plan (Table 1). The first
modern industrial facilities in metallurgy, iron and steel, paper, and chemical industries
were constructed. Moreover, great progress has been made in the production of cement and
building materials and cement. As a result of the statist policies followed between 1930
and 1939, a growth rate that could not be reached in the later periods of the Republic’s
history was achieved. As a result of the realization of the national industry for common
consumption goods with domestic production, the foreign trade deficit has disappeared
and the economy has been freed from foreign dependency (Boratav, 2004). However,
after the Second World War, with the transfer of state enterprises to the private sector and
the reduction of state intervention in foreign economic relations, the industry gradually
became privatized, the foreign dependency increased, and the capital concentrated and
centralized (Tüzün, 1998).

393

Urban Amnesia and Industrial ... Emine BARBAROS AKAY - Hilal Tuğba ÖRMECİOĞLU - Aslı ER AKAN

Table 1. Factories were founded mostly in peripheral cities of Anatolia due to the First Five-Year
Development Plan in 1934

Date of Inauguration Name of Industrial Plant

1935 Sümerbank Bakırköy Textile Factory

1937 Sümerbank Kayseri Textile Factory

1937 Sümerbank Ereğli Textile Factory

1939 Sümerbank Nazilli Textile Factory

1939 Sümerbank Malatya Textile Factory

1938 Sümerbank Bursa Merinos Factory

1936 İzmit Pulp and Paper Mill (1.)

- İzmit Pulp and Paper Mill (2.)

1936 İzmit Selüloz Pulp Mill

1938 Sümerbank Gemlik Artificial Silk Mill

1939 Karabük İron and Steel Plant

1935 Zonguldak Hard-coal Plant

1935 Keçiborlu Sulphur Plant

1935 İstanbul Glass Manufacturing Plant

1935 Isparta Rose Oil Factory

Source: Zeybekoğlu, 2009.

Factories have caused population growth and urbanization in the regions where they were
established. Each factory has created a significant labor population in the region where it was
founded and has been a job opportunity and a source of development for the local community.
Small industrial and commercial zones have been developed in the close vicinity of the factories
as a result of the needs of the increasing population, and the formation of subsidiary industrial
organizations. Table 2 below shows the impact of industry on the urban population.

Table 2. Population growth in industrial regions, based on DİE statistics

Regions 1927 1935 1940 1945 1950 1955
122.720 157.242 226.712 288.537 451.241
Ankara 74.884 741.143 793.949 860.558 983.041 1.268.771
170.959 170.959 198.396 227.578 296.559
İstanbul 690.857 76.473 88.119 100.780 117.642 168.628
- - 14.496 14.450 27.807
İzmir 153.924 5.843 5.415 6.360 7.132 7.878
12.005 16.478 18.986 25.106 31.487
Adana 72.577

Kırklareli -

Ereğli 5.180

Nazilli 9.325

Source: Şengül, 2001

While the growth rate of Izmir and Istanbul, where the policy of statism applied,
was 1.4%; the growth rate of the population in small settlements of Anatolia such as
Kırklareli, Ereğli, and Nazilli was 5% (Zeybekoğlu, 2009).

394

Industrial Heritage in the Urban Identity and Memory Axis

In addition to the employment provided by the factories, they also supported the
development of the regions and created powerful traces in the urban macro form where
they were established with their educational and social facilities. Although these traces
are distinct in cities that are still industrial, such as Kayseri, Istanbul, Bursa, etc. they are
implicit in some cities that have a forgotten past of industrialization like Antalya.

Industrial Past of Antalya

Antalya, which is known as a center of tourism today, had an unknown history of
industrialization attempts from the late 19th to mids of the 20th century. Important developments
regarding industrialization in Antalya started to take place within the scope of the development
and modernization projects brought along by the Republican regime and gained momentum
since 1950. In order to understand the industrialization in the city, it has been examined under
three sub-headings. These are the Late Ottoman Period, which covers the end of the 19th
century and the first quarter of the 20th century, the Early Republic Period (1923-1950) when
industrialization was attempted by the government support and the initiatives of local merchant
families, and the Cooperatives Period when large-scale industrial structures were built within the
scope of the dynamics of the cooperative in the mid-20th century (1950-1980).

Industrial buildings of the late Ottoman Period in Antalya

In the Late Ottoman Period, the economy of Antalya was based on agriculture,
animal husbandry, and in part, trade. There was no exact data on the industrial structures,
but as a result of the literature research, it is possible to get a general impression about
the factories established in this period. Industrial buildings built in Antalya in the Late
Ottoman Period mostly consist of small-scale buildings which were mostly located on
the forks of the Düden Stream flowing in the city at that time (Çimrin, 2017) (Figure
1). In these industrial buildings, far from their counterparts in Europe, the traditional
production method was preferred. Flour mills, ice plants, and gas warehouses can be
given as examples of the industrial buildings in this period.

The flour mills

Flour mills constitute the majority of the industrial buildings in Antalya in the
late Ottoman period. Traditional flour mills were among the first examples of industrial
buildings where water-powered grain milling was performed. The flour mills in the center
of Antalya were located on the forks of the Düden Stream flowing in the city at that time
(Çimrin, 2017). According to the records of 1913, there were 8 flour mills in Antalya city
center in those years, some of them were on the coast and the others in Değirmenönü
region (Dinç and Bakırcılar 2012). As a result of the high grain production at the end
of the 19th century and the effective use of the mills in the region, the city became a
leader in flour trade (Çimrin, 2017).

395

Urban Amnesia and Industrial ... Emine BARBAROS AKAY - Hilal Tuğba ÖRMECİOĞLU - Aslı ER AKAN

Figure 1. The locations of the factories built in Antalya during the Late Ottoman Period
Source: Barbaros Akay, 2020

As Çimrin conveyed (2017), there were six flour mills, side by side on Değirmenönü
Street (Figure 2). In addition to these mills, there were three other flour mills known as
“mansion mills” on the forks of the Düden Stream flowing into the sea from the cliffs. All
of them were hydropower operated. Unfortunately, the ones on the cliffs were damaged
during the First World War.

The first of the mansion mills was the flour mill located in the Marina, at the end of the
Iskele slope, in the area formerly known as Hasbahçe and is now used as a parking lot. It is not
possible to find any traces of the structure that continued production until the bombing in 1916.

396

Industrial Heritage in the Urban Identity and Memory Axis

Figure 2. Flour Mill restored (Archive of the Antalya Council for the Conservation of
Cultural Property-ACCCP)

The second of these mills is the Simon Mill, which was built by the Italians in the
Rumkuş Mevkii, south of Tevfik Işık Caddesi, and was bombed by the French in 1916
(Figure 3). Today, the walls and the front facade of the building can be partially seen. It
is on the list of immovable cultural property in need of protection. Although restoration
projects have been prepared for the re-functioning of the building, it has not been restored
yet.

Figure 3. Simon Flour Mill after the bombing (Archive of the Antalya Council for the
Conservation of Cultural Property-ACCCP)

397

Urban Amnesia and Industrial ... Emine BARBAROS AKAY - Hilal Tuğba ÖRMECİOĞLU - Aslı ER AKAN

Figure 4. Hacı Yanni Karayorgioğlu Flour Mill, 1915 The third of these flour mills
Source: Çimrin 2017 was belonging to Zorlu and Hacı Yanni
Karayorgioğlu, located in the south of Kaleiçi,
at the south end where Işıklar Street reaches the
sea. The building was located on a very thin
line between the road and the sea. The building,
which was completed in 1914 was the largest
mill in the city at the time of its construction. It
was damaged during the French bombardment
in 1916 (Figure 4). In the following years, the
ground floor of the factory was transformed
into a small mill and operated until the 1970s
(Çimrin, 2017).

The ice plant

Another building type among the

industrial buildings of the Late Ottoman Period

was the ice plant. It was the first factory that

generates electricity with hydropower in ice

production. It was built in 1918 on one of the

forks of Düden Stream next to the Hıdırlık

Tower (Figure 5). The building was partially

destroyed during the restoration of the Hıdırlık

Figure 5. Ice Plant (Archive of the Antalya Council for tower, and today it is on the list of immovable
the Conservation of Cultural Property)
cultural property in need of protection.

Figure 6. Gas Warehouse at Marine The gas warehouse
Source: http://www.eskiturkiye.net
It was a two-story gas warehouse built
by the Italians at the end of the 19th century,
where the gas oil coming to the city by ships
was stored. It was used as a flour warehouse in
the following years; until destroyed by French
warships during World War I. The upper floor
and roof of the building were damaged. Its
ground floor and roof cover were repaired and
continued to be used as a gas facility (Figure
6).

398