The city skylines, which we can call the ‘faces’ of cities, are more than a line-up of a series of buildings to give a nearly two-dimensional impression; they are a reflection of the historic accumulation in cities. Nowadays, the effect of high-rise buildings built within the existing skylines is being felt exceedingly more than the past. In 2011, three skyscrapers began to be built in Zeytinburnu, a district of Istanbul which –when looking from the city centre towards the historic Istanbul silhouette- lies axially behind the historic peninsula. These three contemporary skyscrapers peeking through the more ‘classical’ domes, minarets and rooftops bothered many academics and city-lovers, who raised their objections to the constructions.
Looking at this situation from a design point of view: throughout history, most historic European cities have generally preserved the low to medium height of buildings in their city centres, and have isolated singular or grouped high-rise buildings in a designated area of the city. However, the examples in the United States the city centres are composed of tall buildings which get shorter as one moves towards the city fringe. This ambition existing in the United States of obtaining the highest rent from each square meter has started influencing European cities since the end of the last century. Istanbul, a city on the global super league of world cities, is positioned within a strong cultural and historical context, just like many European cities. On the other hand, it faces the pressures created by the physical and economic growth. Thus, to some, these tall structures are completely foreign to the character of the city, while to others they are profitable investment tools.
High rise buildings and their modern stylistic typologies are usually associated with ‘now world’ cities such as New York and Chicago, in which they were born. The socio-economic context, spatial environment and historical traditions in which such architectural design is positioned in European cities are very different. As a result, European cities needed to develop specific responses in response to this situation.
Let’s look at three European cities, as examples for Istanbul. The current policy of London controls certain viewing points and corridors from strategic points of the city, where the importance of St Paul’s Cathedral and Westminster Palace is especially stressed. In Frankfurt, three high-rise cluster areas are designated with special guidelines for street level activities and open spaces. The lands outside the Central Business District and these three areas only allow a maximum height of 20m per building. The historic centre of Paris allows high constructions (within no height limit) in La Defense only, the rest having a limit of 6 storeys.
One has many options to view Istanbul’s skyline: the ferry, bridge, waterfront, and terraces… The Istanbul skyline gathers structures from varied eras and functions, resulting in an ensemble of towers, minarets, domes and roofs. Two buildings constructed 200 years apart can share the same skyline, meaning that historic anachronisms are not justifications for visual incompatibilities. In terms of urban planning and design, high-rise buildings can add articulation to the city and make them more attractive, however the fact that many skyscrapers constructed in Istanbul are mostly devoid of any stylistic merit, is a factor endangering the authenticity of the city skyline.
In the field of product design where city skylines are used as inspiration for numerous design objects, we can see the importance of a harmony of visually compatible buildings. Mugs, wall stickers, pillows and mirrors are being designed, on which an Istanbul skyline is represented. One of the most creative objects within this approach is the lampshade designed by Lunapark for Phare Lighting. The Turkish glassware company Paşabahçe’s tea-lights, tea-glasses and napkin holders featuring the Istanbul skyline have also become popular gifts. Maybe in the near future Istanbul will be featured along with Rio, Berlin, New York, Shanghai and Barcelona in Roca’s ceramic sink series inspired by skylines or in Muji’s ‘city in a box’ series. In these designs inspired by the instantly recognizable and aesthetic city silhouettes, it is obvious how meaningless the skyscrapers in Zeytinburnu would look.
In the current situation, the skyline policy that Istanbul needs cannot be a series of rules setting out only what is not allowed. A design policy must be developed for the city –with certain designated zones each having their own policy- by collaboration between architects, historians, designers, artists and urban planners. After all, who can deny that the architectural identity of any addition to the Istanbul skyline should be developed with a creative design?
And some final questions: What if these accused buildings were not skyscrapers but yet another uncreative, oversized copies of the Sehzade Mosque? What would the reactions be to that? Does a historic religious –yet utterly unoriginal- connotation justify its insertion into a historic skyline?
This post is a translation of the article published in the Design Newspaper in April 2012
All rights on the text, pictures, visual or electronic materials that are published in this website which is copyrighted or owned by Banu Pekol are reserved. The publication of such material in the website should not be interpreted as to provide any rights with regard to the use, licensing or permission thereof.
