ANTAKYA MUSEUM DESIGN BY EMRE AROLAT
ANTAKYA MUSEUM DESIGN BY EMRE AROLAT
Antakya, Turkey
The archeological findings discovered in an excavation on the project site in Antakya which is close to St. Pierre Church (an important Christian pilgrimage site), directed the employer who was planning to build a five-star hotel, to build a museum-hotel on the site. The dichotomy between the public program of an archeological park and the private use of the hotel becomes a major input in the design process.
The findings discovered during the excavations and the physical and sociological characteristics of Antakya act as primary sources of contextual information. The hotel, a placeless building-type defined by its own programmatic codes; turns itself inside out to deal with the specific characteristics of this unique situation and place. Since the hotel will be situated on a site characterized by archeological findings, in order to deal with this unique situation the program elements are considered as individual units spread on the site under a protective canopy, rather than building a compact, introverted, conventional hotel building.
The location of the findings discovered on site determines the exact location of the columns. The composite columns are situated on the trace of former riverbed that goes through the middle of the site and on the periphery of the site in order to minimize any potential damage to the findings. The canopy supported by these columns acts both as a marker for the archeological park and as a platform housing program elements such as the ballroom, meeting rooms, swimming pool and fitness center. This platform creates vista points to enjoy the view of the city and St.Pierre Hill and sustains the local tradition of roof terraces. Slits on the platform act as skylights for the archeological site below and provide a visual connection between the findings and the hotel amenities located on the platform.
The main body of hotel is consisted of prefabricated hotel-room units stacked on top of each other. The room-units placed on the steel sub-structure are connected to the main circulation with walkways and bridges. The rooms are located under the main canopy and this semi-open space creates an inner world where one can experience the climate and local conditions and has visual contact with the excavation site all the time. Terraces and gardens located under the canopy enhance the experience. The lobby, restaurant and lounge are located on the lower levels in relation with the archeological site. With its characteristics, the hotel becomes a site-specific building without compromising spatial standards of a five-star hotel.
The open-air circulation path, composed of ramps and bridges, allows visitors to experience the archeological park from different perspectives. The InfoBox marks the beginning of the path and displays information about the findings on the site.
The pre-fabricated components of the hotel help minimize in-situ fabrication. The building is assembled on site rather than being built there and reminds one of the temporary structures built by archeologists during the excavation.
The archeological findings discovered in an excavation on the project site in Antakya which is close to St. Pierre Church (an important Christian pilgrimage site), directed the employer who was planning to build a five-star hotel, to build a museum-hotel on the site. The dichotomy between the public program of an archeological park and the private use of the hotel becomes a major input in the design process. The findings discovered during the excavations and the physical and sociological characteristics of Antakya act as primary sources of contextual information. The hotel, a placeless building-type defined by its own programmatic codes; turns itself inside out to deal with the specific characteristics of this unique situation and place. Since the hotel will be situated on a site characterized by archeological findings, in order to deal with this unique situation the program elements are considered as individual units spread on the site under a protective canopy, rather than building a compact, introverted, conventional hotel building. The location of the findings discovered on site determines the exact location of the columns. The composite columns are situated on the trace of former riverbed that goes through the middle of the site and on the periphery of the site in order to minimize any potential damage to the findings. The canopy supported by these columns acts both as a marker for the archeological park and as a platform housing program elements such as the ballroom, meeting rooms, swimming pool and fitness center. This platform creates vista points to enjoy the view of the city and St.Pierre Hill and sustains the local tradition of roof terraces. Slits on the platform act as skylights for the archeological site below and provide a visual connection between the findings and the hotel amenities located on the platform.The main body of hotel is consisted of prefabricated hotel-room units stacked on top of each other. The room-units placed on the steel sub-structure are connected to the main circulation with walkways and bridges. The rooms are located under the main canopy and this semi-open space creates an inner world where one can experience the climate and local conditions and has visual contact with the excavation site all the time. Terraces and gardens located under the canopy enhance the experience. The lobby, restaurant and lounge are located on the lower levels in relation with the archeological site. With its characteristics, the hotel becomes a site-specific building without compromising spatial standards of a five-star hotel. The open-air circulation path, composed of ramps and bridges, allows visitors to experience the archeological park from different perspectives. The InfoBox marks the beginning of the path and displays information about the findings on the site.The pre-fabricated components of the hotel help minimize in-situ fabrication. The building is assembled on site rather than being built there and reminds one of the temporary structures built by archeologists during the excavation.
www.emrearolat.com
http://mymagicalattic.blogspot.com.tr/2014/06/santral-istanbul-museum-of-contemporary.html
A
You may reach to see Emre Arolat’s other projects of Istanbul Antrepo 5 Museum and Santral Istanbul Museum of ContemporaryArts from my blog archive to click below links.
http://mymagicalattic.blogspot.com.tr/2014/06/santral-istanbul-museum-of-contemporary.html
EMRE AROLAT’S PHILOSOPHY
Using two quite
disjunct channels, architecture and its product, the building, occurred more
frequently than before in the entrepreneurial and madcap urban environments of
post-1980. The building either became, directly as its very self, an effective
medium for the politics of the day, or, within the trend mechanisms of the day,
it occupied the environment through the visual values that took shape with it.
It can easily be claimed that during this period, the latter lagged in
comparison with the former, both because it was much flimsier, and as a quite naïve
channel when compared with the pragmatic realities of the former.
This new environment
outside of the world of architecture also put the architects who produced those
buildings on the agenda, in a way never experienced until then. After that,
certain buildings ceased to be talked about exclusively within that world, a
fact which for years had grieved the world of architecture. And what’s more,
certain buildings or projects were now being mentioned not in conjunction with
their investors’ or contractors’ names, as was always the complaint, but in
conjunction with their architects’ name. And today, we can finally speak of an
amateur audience other than architects. This group problematizes not only the
quantitative inputs to which it has direct access, but even the design
motivations that determine the success of the project. In fact, it
reasons, dissects and comments in a way that shows so much initiative that this
time it angers the world of architecture.
Today, apart from,
or maybe even opposed to the fact that the architect is valued outside of the
architectural world, and that he/she is glorified with such exaggeration that
even the architects themselves are taken aback, there might also be a danger of
being trivialized by the world outside to the degree that he/she is unable to
expand and enrich his/her own inner world. It will be interesting to think of
this opposition together with the fact that certain milieus of the modern
world, both within and outside the profession, somehow manage to approach each
other, blend, and gradually become homogenized. However, another subject that
rates a lengthy discussion is how the architectural environment has lately been
finding it difficult to re-produce itself, and to what degree it faces the
danger of gradually becoming stunted. In an environment where the number of
those whose sole motivation is to protect their status and those who are quite
content with both themselves and the world is increasing at an astonishing
rate; this discussion may also trigger a debate on how and at what rate
architecture can become socialized. And it is obvious that this shallow and
introverted situation is not peculiar only to Turkey…
In our studio, where
we produce many different subjects and on many different scales, we
aim to maintain an architectural design practice focused on “situation” and to
develop this through the potentials inherent to it. This is a practice based on
identifying the individual problems of each project, of each special situation,
distinguishing their particular inputs, and looking for answers to the
situation that has now become specific through a description that is as
stratified as possible. Familiar styles, motivations of architectural
movements, and design conventions are introduced at times, however, a noteworthy
investment in these are put off each time. This tendency also problematizes a
sort of aspiration to be consistent, which is rather widespread in the milieu
and which pins its hopes on the kinship in the appearance of buildings
produced. For instance, a design might loosen the specific parameters of the
situation faced in each project, and determine its entire motive, while
practically ignoring, so as to achieve a building that is as plain, spare and
purified as possible; we do not strictly distinguish the unconditional choice
of such a design from that which chooses, as a general attitude, to be
expressionistic or polyphonic from the outset. We believe that the situation of
“being chosen in a mechanical way”, which is the fundamental characteristic of
the seemingly antipodal two attitudes, uproots them both from the real world
and renders them no different from one another.
And we hope that our
design tendency, which could be called a sort of “tropism”, will be able
to reach the marks of its inherent consistency – if there is such a thing –
through the “quest for awareness” in the process of redefining each time what
is to be conceived. However, we must add right away that this quest does not
aim for a “perfect” kind of consistency that healthy, adult and civilized human
beings supposedly have. We might even say that the attitude in question is one
that senses that such consistency can never be achieved and that once it starts
to grasp the world in this way, it considers it important to understand and
take seriously the nonconformities of that world. This is an attitude in which
the creative subjects – the persons in charge of the design –, just like the
product they create, feel that they themselves are not entirely free of these
nonconformities, in which they question each time both the situation and
themselves instead of forming consistent systems, instead of playing it safe,
and contenting themselves with what suits their best interest.
We feel that the
design process acquires an appeal that is open to a gradual deepening through
the individualities of the subject who conditions it and through the fantasy it
will rediscover in itself. At this point it can be claimed that the
phenomenon we consider important and which we expect will take its place in the
process alongside awareness is “consciousness”. “Consciousness” forces the
multilayered and two-edged game, which occupies the zone between matter and the
intellect, to fit somewhere within the framework of passion, intuition,
knowledge and breeding. The moment it is introduced, it begins to condition the
work and thanks to it the potentials created by the fact that it is possible to
continue to work on the piece forever are abandoned at one go but just at the
right time and in moderation. Consciousness turns the work into a project while
reminding us of the presence of incompleteness and two-edgedness and the
futility of the quest for maturity.
http://www.emrearolat.com/about/philosophy/
EMRE AROLAT STUDIO
EAA - Emre Arolat Architecture was founded in May 2004 by Emre
Arolat and Gonca Paşolar in Istanbul, as the continuation of Emre Arolat’s
architectural practices which he started at his parents’ office, Arolat
Architects, as an associate designer in 1987. Since its establishment, EAA has
turned out to be one of the largest architectural offices in Turkey with a team
of more than 50 people, with the reintegration of Şaziment and Neşet Arolat as
partners. The firm continues its practice at the offices in İstanbul and London
with projects that range from mixed-use buildings occupying millions of square
meters, to a small place of worship counting only five hundred square meters.
EAA has taken place
in many prestigious and important national and international projects.
Cooperation with worldwide known engineering and consultancy firms has
extensively been performed, which is being carried out by means of several
computer programming of the latest technology. The projects are being developed
completely in three dimensional models, from concept design to the details in
depth, which is also valid for coordination with engineering systems. Design is
pursued till the smallest detail, comprehensively elaborated, solved and drawn.
Further than the power of design, the amount and quality of detailing, and
supportive supervision in all stages of construction has gained special
exclusivity to EAA services among its so-called equivalents in the market. The
belief that the exact success of a design may only be enhanced by extensive
detailing, in all disciplines, has reached to commitment to a full design
package.
The group also has a
considerable presence in the academic world. The founder Emre Arolat has been
active at various schools of architecture with lectures, jury contributions and
studio tutorage, such as Berlage Institute at Delft, Pratt Institute at New
York, Middle East Technical University at Ankara, CEPT University at Ahmedabad,
several institutions in Istanbul like Mimar Sinan Fine Arts Academy, Istanbul
Technical University, Yıldız Technical University and Bilgi University where
was among the founders of Graduate Program. Apart from himself, group leaders
in EAA perform in similar contributions.
Architectural
significance of the group was supported by many awards, most notably of which
are Aga Khan Award, The European Union Prize for Contemporary Architecture -
Mies van der Rohe Award, World Architecture Festival Awards and AR Emerging
Architecture Award.
http://www.emrearolat.com/the-studio/about/
