Look What You Made Me Do / Review of ARCH301 Final Jury

This post will be mainly about the final jury of Arch301, what I did and the discussions during the Jury.

Let me start with the explanation of my final project. The main strategy is creating an extraverted structure to the city. In order to do this, I tried to combine to different strategies, fragmentation and capillarity. West side of the site, composite of mass buildings especially khans and from east to west the buildings are getting fragmented, that’s why I tried to use fragmentation. I have a volume of kitchen related mass that includes kitchen lab, dining hall, bar and an open-air dining hall. Other functions are disturbing through that mass. In the ground floor, I tried to fragment function with the capillarity that comes from to urban fabric of the Gaziantep.

In Gaziantep, even though their destination the same, the roads are getting differentiated. I tried to apply this idea with a gathering space. In the center of the structure, I have a gathering space. There are many roads that leads you to this gathering space which occurs with the exhibition walls.

In ground floor, the functions are generally open to fabric. There is a coffee house, entrances of the building, rental shops, exhibition area, and auditorium. Entrances are differentiated from each other according to users. One of them is for public users, and from that entrance people can reach to dining hall, and accommodation. The gift shop is located here for interaction. The second entrance for kitchen. It leads you to kitchen lab and classes. There are dressing rooms for hygiene is located there. For ground floor, we can say that, more related with the city.

As I mentioned, first floor for kitchen related activities. For second floor, accommodation and classes are located. The façade of this part was designed with linear windows in order to give its wholeness.

Finally, I have two stairs for two entrances that are related with the historical buildings of Gaziantep. The stairs pop-up from the structure. In my thought, they are a supporter for observing the building as a whole from outside.

General approach of the structure was liked by the jury. Fragmentation of the ground floor was seen positive and the gathering area was working well according to jury members. The main critic was about the façade articulation. They said, it is positive to use linear windows for first floor, but the façade of second floor was problematic, they can be more open to public.

Also, for south part of the structure, the glass of the stairs was questioned, and I said that they were not totally glass. It was problematic because of the model, since I couldn’t make the wooden sun breakers.

Another critic was about the stairs. The idea of having pop-up spaces for stairs was liked but they suggested to have an outside entrance for them. In my opinion, it can be problematic for building, but I will work on this part.

Also, I will work on the location of the shops as well. Even though they are supporting to idea of capillarity, they were too separate from the structure. The strategy for the shops was coming from the rental shops of the Khans and they were continuation for it. They said it is working but, the shops should be more integrated with the building.

There are some problems about the poster design, but the jury liked the drawings.

That’s all from my jury. I really enjoyed while working on this project and, I took the first photo of digital models, so I will put them below with my poster. Don’t leave the page without looking them.



And the First Jury of the Semester

We did it. We overcame to first jury. In my opinion, it was a nice jury and I hope we get some good scores from it. So, let’s talk about what we did for this jury.

In previous critics, we were criticized a lot on what we did. So, we were hopeless, and we have only two days before jury. We immediately started to work. First, we went deeper analysis about the site. Where is human density, how the roads coming together, what is the important aspects of the site and so on. After that, we decided what could be the image of the building. We noticed that east side of our site has important conditions such as khans, human densitiy and so but the west side is reserved for residential areas. That’s why we decided that the construction can have a transition condition for site. In order to do this, we suggest some proposals. Such as extroversion, fragmentation and capillarity. We diagrammatize those ideas in various ways. We don’t want to suggest one solution for each condition, that’s why we used variations of one solution. For example, for fragmentation, the idea is coming from the urban fabric of the Gaziantep. We noticed that the site that is given to us has some conditions about urban fabric. East side of the site mostly massive and commercial buildings but the west side is fragmented and residential. So, we said that the building can have a concept of fragmentation. In order to do this, we suggested 3 variations The masses could subtracted from the mass, there could be a gradual fragmentation or the building seems massive from outside but it fragmented from inside.

The main critic that come to us is about working on the programmatic elements in their own sizes. We generally worked on the human density in a program but not square meter of it. So, it is suggested that, it could create some problems in further stages, so we have to look them, too.


Initial Proposals and Diagrams Before the Jury

After the SWOT analysis, we were assigned to propose some ideas and design proposals as a group. We firstly look at the sites and try to understand them. As an initial idea, we thought that a courtyard could be a proposal for Gaziantep. But we don’t want to have a courtyard which has no relation with outside. That’s why, we transform the courtyard to ‘meydan.’ With the help of it we thought that the building can integrate with the city. Also, we produce some diagrams for programmatic elements. We have different scenarios for different dominant parts and we centralize it.  We worked on some specific programs and their visual relations.

A Helpful Tool for Designing: SWOT Analysis

SWOT is a term that coming from the first letters of: Strength, Weakness, Opportunity and Threats. It is a helpful tool for analyzing a condition. In architecture, as we learned, using SWOT analysis can help our design proposals. That’s why we asked to make a SWOT analysis on our sites. As a group, we worked on SWOT of Bey Mahallesi and Antep Houses. We analyzed what is the strength, weakness, opportunity and threats of the site. We mainly get help from our own experiences and mostly articles related with Gaziantep.

You can find SWOT analysis that we produce below.

arch301_SWOT_ CemregulkayaBusemertBusratanogluBerilderensimsek

Analyzing Bey Mahallesi

After turning back to Ankara, we assigned to document what we analyze and observe in Gaziantep. As a group, we worked on Bey Mahallesi. Firstly, we looked to landmarks of the site. After that, we analyzed the condition of the roads and accessibility to landmarks. After that we observed the spatial and architectural importance of Antep Houses. We documented them in the poster below.


Let’s Eat and Work: Site Trip to Gaziantep

IMG-7931This year’s project located in Gaziantep. So, we went to Gaziantep for ‘work’ 😀 I would like to talk a little about the trip.

IMG-7954The first station was Zeugma Mosaic Museum. There are a lot of mosaics that we had a chance to see them directly. Another station that we visit is Emine Gümüş Gastronomy Museum. It was a worthy experience to visit since our topic is a about Culinary Center. We had a workshop there about the cooking. We made ‘bastık tatlısı’ and ‘mahlıtalı köfte.’ There was also a presentation about the center itself and about Gaziantep. At the end we asked some questions about the missing part and what they needed in the station in order to understand our project.


And second day, we worked on our project. As a group, we assigned to analyze Bey Mahallesi in Gaziantep. This district is important to understand historical side of Gaziantep, and Antep Houses. We looked the landmarks of the site, what is important, circulation of the roads and so on.

Of course, we ate a lot of beautiful things in Gaziantep. That was the best part of the trip actually 😀 For last, day we went to Zeugma Ancient City and then we turned back to Ankara.