Toplu konut bağlamında bir mimarlık tartışması: Evidea konutları
An architectural discussion in the context of mass housing: Evidea housing
Yazar: ONURSAL ENGEL
Danışman: DOÇ. DR. NİZAM ONUR SÖNMEZ
İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi / Lisansüstü Eğitim Enstitüsü / Mimarlık Ana Bilim Dalı / Mimari Tasarım Bilim Dalı
Derece: Yüksek Lisans, 2022
Konu: Mimarlık = Architecture
Dizin: Kentsel gelişme = Urban development ; Konut üretimi = Housing production ; Mimari tasarım = Architectural design ; Toplu konutlar = Mass houses ; İstanbul = Istanbul

Özet:
Bu tez çalışması, 2003 yılında İstanbul'daki kentsel dönüşüm ve hızlı toplu konut üretimi süreçleri içerisinde Ümraniye-Çekmeköy bölgesinde bir GYO (Gayrimenkul Yatırım Ortaklığı) projesi olarak üretilmeye başlanmış olan Evidea toplu konutlarını, tasarım süreci ve kararları, mimarları ve mimari söylemleri, üretim süreci ve yapının bugünü ile birlikte analiz edilmesini amaçlamaktadır. Üretim modeli, yatırımcıları ve teknik ve yasalara tabi tasarım kısıtlamaları ile birlikte, İstanbul'da bugün artık alışılmış olan kapalı toplu konut sitelerinden biri olarak yola çıkan Evidea'nın, "tasarım" yoluyla ortaya çıkarılmaya çalışılan alternatif pozisyonu tartışılmaktadır. Tez işveren, mimar ve yapı arasındaki ilişkileri, dönemin şartları, piyasa ve yasal kısıtlar dahilinde ortaya çıkarılan sonuç üründeki tasarım kararlarıyla birlikte anlamlandırmaya çalışmaktadır. Bunu yaparken işverenlerinden Hakan Kodal'ın beklentilerini, yapının üretim süreci içindeki değişimleriyle birlikte ortaya çıkan son halini, mimarları Emre Arolat, Nevzat Sayın ve İhsan Bilgin'in yapıya dair tasarımsal söylemleri ve tasarım kararlarına dair verdikleri mimari referansları sorunsallaştırmayı amaçlamaktadır.
Tezin özgün araştırma konusunu oluşturan Evidea Toplu konutları, tez kapsamında 2000 sonrası konut üretimlerinde başlayan değişimler, orta sınıfla ilişkili konut üretimi ve yapının hikayesi ve tasarımına dair tartışmaların ilerletildiği üç ana başlık üzerinden incelenecektir. Bu başlıklar Evidea Konutları merkezli bu çalışmanın kapsamını oluştururken, başlıkların oluşmasını sağlayan arka plan ise tezin teorik çerçevesini ortaya koymaktadır. Tez, öncelikle Evidea Konutlarını var eden 2000'li yılların başında İstanbul'da konut ve inşaat süreçleri içinde şehirleşmeye, yatırımcılara, konut sunum biçimlerine ve kullanıcılara dair değişimleri ve bunların mimarlığa etkisini Evidea Konutları merkezinde tartışmaktadır. Bununla birlikte Evidea Konutları özelinde işveren ve mimarlarının ısrarla üstünde durduğu "orta sınıf için konut" söylemi, sınıf kavramının farklı tanımlamaları ve Türkiye'deki orta ve alt sınıfların ne olduğuna dair bir tartışmayla birlikte ele alınarak, sınıf kavramıyla ilişkili konut bağlamında tartışılarak, tanımlanmaya çalışılmıştır. 
Tezin araştırma yöntemi gömülü kuram (grounded theory) etrafında şekillenmiştir. Yöntem kapsamında, Evidea projesinin ilk yatırım kararından tasarım sürecine, üretimine ve bugününe gelen süreçteki tüm hikayesi, belgeleme, derleme, yapıya dair gözlemler/karşılaştırmalar, işveren ve mimarlarıyla yapılan yarı yapılandırılmış görüşmeler sonucunda ortaya çıkan tüm veriler, yapının mimari söylemleri ve olası tarihsel referansları ile birlikte dördüncü bölümde tartışılmıştır. Bu tartışma, yapının salt tasarımsal kararlarının yanı sıra tasarım kararların olası tarihsel referanslarını, yapının güncel ve tarihsel örneklerle karşılaştırmasını, İstanbul'daki diğer toplu konut tasarımlarının içinde Evidea'nın pozisyonunu da içermektedir. 
Sonuç bölümünde ise tüm tartışmalar birlikte ele alınarak, bir meslek insanı olarak mimarın üretim süreçlerine mimari tasarım yoluyla etkisi tartışılmaya çalışılmış ve üretiminin üzerinden geçen 15 yılın ardından Evidea Konutlarının İstanbul konut stoğu içindeki yerine dair bir çıkarım yapılmaya çalışılmıştır.

Abstract:
This thesis aims to analyze Evidea Housing's design process and decisions, architects and architectural discourses, production process and the present day of the building, which was produced as a REIT (Real Estate Investment Trust) project in Ümraniye, Istanbul after 2000. The alternative position of Evidea Housing, which started out as a gated community in Istanbul with its production model, investors and "technical and legal design restrictions", which is tried to be revealed through design, is discussed. In the context of an architectural approach, which we can explain as "to seize opportunities for architectural creativity within the constraints of the market and municipality, rather than criticizing today's housing production because it cannot go beyond commercialization," the thesis focuses on the architects of the building, Emre Arolat, Nevzat Sayın and İhsan Bilgin.
This mass housing project, designed by Emre Arolat, Nevzat Sayın and İhsan Bilgin, differs from both the examples of its period and the examples of closed and secure mass housing that will increase after Evidea Housing. The emphasis that it is produced for the "middle class", which is expressed both in its marketing and in the discourses of its architects, and the contradiction that it reveals in terms of attributing a class position to its users as a mass housing structure produced for profit with large investors makes the building interesting as a research subject. In addition, the design decisions of Evidea Housing, which are tried to be legitimized by the architects in various presentations and interviews with the references given to different mass housing productions in the history of architecture, also contain the contradictions of the architect as a professional and architectural production. The thesis establishes the starting point of these contradictions by associating Manfredo Tafuri's thesis with the thesis that "Architecture, as a profession that needs state power and big investors so much, cannot produce solutions that protect the interests of the low-income segment that the system itself exploits (Tafuri, 1973)." When the production of Evidea Housing is evaluated together with the discourses of its architects, the relationship of the architect with the housing production has changed considerably compared to the past years, especially within the neoliberal relations network after the 1980s. The contradictions that arise when mass housing production is evaluated together with the historical accumulation of social housing productions at the beginning of the 20th century in the history of architecture constitute the main problems discussed in the thesis.
The research method of this study is shaped around the grounded theory. The architectural discussion area, from which the study started, was created by compiling the articles written by the architects on Evidea Housing, conference presentations, other opinion articles about the building and the contents of architectural journals. The data obtained on the production process of the building as a result of this first textual material study gave rise to the idea that Evidea Housing can be featured as an architectural case study. With these first data, visits to Evidea Housing at various times and observations made in common areas and some indoor spaces expanded the data set. The questions arising from the data obtained from the building revealed the necessity of conducting interviews with the architects and the employer of the building in order to make sense of the production process of the building within the scope of an architectural discussion. Within the scope of the method, the data obtained as a result of the semi-structured interviews held separately with the employer of the building, Hakan Kodal, and the architects of the building, Emre Arolat and Nevzat Sayın, provided a connection with other literatures related to the discussion at the center of Evidea Housing.
This study aims to question the position and contradictions of the architect and architectural traditions in relation to housing production in the 21st century conditions in architecture as a discipline. This questioning has been deepened by discussing with Evidea Housing. In the design process of Evidea Housing, the relations between the architect and the employer and the design discourses highlighted by the architects about the building were put forward and discussed, beyond a building analysis, in order to deepen the debate on architectural practice. Evidea Housing, which is the original research subject of the thesis, will be examined under three main headings in which the debates on the changes that started in housing production after 2000, housing production related to the middle class, and the story and design of the building. While these titles constitute the scope of this study centered on Evidea Housing, the background that provides the formation of the titles reveals the theoretical framework of the thesis.
First of all, the change in the housing and construction processes of Turkey in the early 2000s, which brought Evidea Housing into existence, was tried to be understood and other productions in that period were examined. The historical change in the housing production process and its actors after 2000 can be read through criteria such as Evidea Housing' place in urbanization, investors, housing presentation style, targeted housing user, architectural design decisions and the position of the architect in this process. In this part of the study, the changes and actors that enabled the production of Evidea Housing in the urbanization and housing production in the late 1990s and early 2000s in Turkey were discussed. In all this change, the position of the architect and his place as an actor in the housing production process were discussed, and the alternative position that the architects tried to establish in the production process of Evidea Housing was highlighted.
In the second part of the study, the situation expressed for Turkey by the word "middle class residence", which the architects insistently emphasized for Evidea Housing, was tried to be defined by discussing. By evaluating the concept of middle class with its different dimensions, it has been tried to define a middle class for Turkey. The prices of the sales of Evidea Housing in three different stages were compared with the statistical data showing the income levels for Istanbul at that time, and inferences were made about the income level of the users of Evidea Housing. This discussion of housing, which is associated with an economic class, has been supported by examples of social housing, and the discussion has been tried to be deepened. Halkalı Mass Housing, a social housing structure built in Istanbul at the same time as Evidea Housing, is compared with Evidea Housing in relation to the concept of class in this section.
In the third part, where the main subject of the study is examined in depth, the whole story of Evidea Housing project from the first investment decision to the design process, production and today; Documentation, compilation, observations, comparisons on the building and the result of semi-structured interviews with the architect, employer and users were discussed together with the architectural discourses of the building and possible historical references. This discussion; In addition to the pure design decisions of the building, it also includes the possible historical references of the design decisions, the comparison of the building with current and historical examples, and Evidea's position among the other mass housing designs of its architects. Considered as an architectural discussion area, Evidea Housing; A design discussion was carried out under different headings from upper scale to lower scale, such as the settlement plan decisions, the design of the blocks, the design of the housing units and the design of the central courtyard. The reasons for the design decisions taken for all scales have been tried to be revealed within the architect-employer relationship and by associating them with the historical mass housing design heritage. 
In the conclusion part, after fifteen years of production, it has been tried to make an inference about the place of Evidea Housing in Istanbul housing stock and the value it creates as a mass housing building.