See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/279197043

The Technology of an Early Reinforced Concrete Structure in Turkey: The

Great Storehouse of the Kayseri Sümerbank Textile Factory

Conference Paper · June 2015

CITATIONS READS

3 1,566

2 authors:

Burak Asiliskender Nilufer Baturayoglu Yoney

Abdullah Gul University Mustafa Kemal University
17 PUBLICATIONS   42 CITATIONS    8 PUBLICATIONS   20 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Rural Heritage and Cultural Landscapes View project

Restoration and Adaptive Re-use Project for the Warehouse at AGU Sümer Campus View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Burak Asiliskender on 27 June 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Fabbrica della Conoscenza

XIII Forum Internazionale di Studi Vie dei

Le
Mercanti
Carmine Gambardella

HERITAGE
and
TECHNOLOGY
Mind Knowledge Experience

La Scuola di Pitagora editrice

Fabbrica della Conoscenza
Collana fondata e diretta da Carmine Gambardella

Scientific Committee:

Carmine Gambardella,
Professor and Director,
Dipartimento di Architettura e Disegno Industriale
“Luigi Vanvitelli”, Seconda Universita’ di Napoli –
President BENECON

Federico Casalegno,
Professor,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA

Massimo Giovannini,
Professor and Rector,
University “Mediterranea” of Reggio Calabria, Italy

Bernard Haumont,
Professor,
Ecole Nationale Supérieure d’Architecture
Paris Val de Seine, France

Mathias Kondolf,
Professor and Chair,
Landscape Architecture and Environmental Planning,
University California Berkeley, USA

David Listokin,
Professor, Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning
and Public Policy, Rutgers University, USA

Paola Sartorio,
Executive Director, US- Italy Fulbright Commission

Elena Shlienkova,
Professor,
Director of the Project Support Center of Regional
and International Programs of the Russian
Presidential Academy of National Economy
and Public Administration, Russia

Editorial Committee:

Pasquale Argenziano
Alessandra Avella
Alessandro Ciambrone
Nicola Pisacane
Manuela Piscitelli

Il volume è stato inserito nella collana Fabbrica della Conoscenza, fondata e diretta da Carmine Gambardella, in se-
guito a peer review anonimo da parte di due membri del Comitato Scientifico.

The volume has been included in the series Fabbrica della Conoscenza, founded and directed by Carmine Gambar-
della, after an anonymous peer-review by two members of the Scientific Committee.
Carmine Gambardella
HERITAGE and TECHNOLOGY
Mind Knowledge Experience
Le Vie dei Mercanti
XIII Forum Internazionale di Studi





(GLWLQJ0DQXHOD3LVFLWHOOL






© copyright 2015 La scuola di Pitagora s.r.l.
Via Monte di Dio, 54
80132 Napoli
Telefono e fax +39 081 7646814
www.scuoladipitagora.it
info@scuoladipitagora.it

ISBN: 978-88-6542-416-2

È assolutamente vietata la riproduzione totale o

parziale di questa pubblicazione, così come la
sua trasmissione sotto qualsiasi forma e con
qualunque mezzo, anche attraverso fotocopie,
senza l’autorizzazione scritta dell’editore.

Progetto CAMPUS Pompei

Il Progetto “Ecoturismo urbano per la fruizione sostenibile dei Beni Culturali in Campania”, in
attuazione degli Obiettivi Operativi 2.1 e 2.2 del Programma Operativo FESR Campania
2007/2013 per la realizzazione e/o il potenziamento, nel territorio della regione, di forti
concentrazioni di competenze scientifico tecnologiche, di alto potenziale innovativo, intende
favorire la concentrazione di competenze scientifico-tecnologiche finalizzata a rafforzare la
competitività dei sistemi locali e delle filiere produttive regionali non solo nei settori dei
servizi associati al turismo e beni culturali ma anche in settori ad altissima tecnologia che
possano rappresentare una svolta tecnologica e culturale all’approccio innovativo per lo
Sviluppo sostenibile in aree ad altissima vocazione turistica.

4
Conference topics:

Heritage
Tangible and intangible dimensions
History
Culture
Collective Identity
Memory
Documentation
Management
Communication for Cultural Heritage
Architecture
Surveying
Representation
Modelling
Data Integration
Technology Platforms
Analysis
Diagnosis and Monitoring Techniques
Conservation
Restoration
Protection
Safety
Resilience
Transformation Projects
Technologies
Materials
Cultural landscapes
Territorial Surveying
Landscape Projects
Environmental Monitoring
Government of the Territory
Sustainable Development

5
  
 

The Technology of an Early Reinforced Concrete Structure in Turkey:

The Great Storehouse of the Kayseri Sümerbank Textile Factory (1932-
1935)

Nilüfer BATURAYOĞLU YÖNEY,1 Burak ASİLİSKENDER2

(1)
School of Architecture, Abdullah Gül University, Kayseri, Turkey
nilufer.yoney@agu.edu.tr
(2)
burak.asiliskender@agu.edu.tr

Abstract
The former Kayseri Sümerbank Textile Factory (1932-1935) designed and funded by the U.S.S.R. was
among the first large-scaled industrial establishments in Turkey. The so-called Great Storehouse as well as
the rest of the complex constitutes an interesting case study as an early example of large-scaled reinforced
concrete construction in a provincial center for Turkish and Soviet technological history.
The long and narrow building measuring 135x45m is constructed in four sections with wide spanning axes
based on a skeletal system, supported with slender columns and beams. The columns rise 5-6.5m from the
original floor level and reach 9m along the raised central nave. The foundations are composed of double
layers of square footings joined with tie beams. The partition walls are constructed with bricks while the
exterior walls are tuff. All the masonry walls are held together with a weak mortar based on cement, lime and
sand, and with steel reinforcing bars placed horizontally in the horizontal courses and tied to thicker steel
bars vertically along the columns. Horizontal strip windows located in the upper part of the exterior walls and
along the high central nave provide natural light. There are steel hangar doors along the east and west walls
in almost each grid as well as two central doorways located on the short east and west façades. The
reinforced concrete surfaces are left exposed while the brick walls and the interior surfaces of the tuff walls
are plastered.

Keywords: reinforced concrete technology, industrial heritage, modern architecture, construction history,
Kayseri.

1. Kayseri Sümerbank Textile Factory (1932-1935)

Following the foundation of the Turkish Republic in 1923, state policies focused on the modernization and
secularization of the society at large, public education, socio-cultural development, democratization,
industrialization and economic growth. Mustafa Kemal defined this concept as “attaining the cultural level of
contemporary civilizations”. The modest national economic growth in the 1920s was cut short when in 1929
the global crisis as well as the Great Depression that ensued took their toll on Turkey as well. Available
funds were directed towards industrialization and the development of necessary public infrastructure such as
railways as illustrated by the first five-year development plan prepared in 1932-1933 and dated January
1934. [1] The first major investments based on this plan were the textile factories in Kayseri and Nazilli, the
architectural and production design for which were developed with U.S.S.R. (Soviet) consultancy and
financial and technological aid (Fig. 1).
The Kayseri Sümerbank Textile Factory was not only a major industrial investment but also a socio-cultural
one directed at the urban and economic development of a provincial center in Turkey. This was a further
boost for Kayseri where various strategic investments were already made such as the airplane factory with
German partnership and the tank montage and repair works with Soviet partnership (1926), the Ankara-
Kayseri railway line (1927), the Bünyan hydroelectric and carpet yarn plants (1929), and the Kayseri-Sivas-
Samsun and Kayseri-Ulukışla railway lines (1930). [2]

266
Fig. 1: The original layout of the Kayseri Sümerbank Textile Factory, 1932-1935. [16]

The Soviet experts proposed the textile plant after field studies in 1932. Architect Professor Ivan Nikolaev,
who was also one of these experts, became the chief designer of the plant through Turkstroj, a commercial
trust founded for this purpose in Moscow in 1933. The 20-year Soviet loan was received in 1934 and the
construction of the complex was completed in 1935 by Abdurrahman Naci Bey, a Turkish contractor. [3]
There is almost no information about this personality, who undertook such a major project. He was not listed
among the contractors and engineers in the yearbooks of the period, such as the Annuaire Oriental volumes
dated to 1927 and 1928, and the İzmir Guide of 1926. [4]
The complex is located on the northern development axis of the city, close to the railroad. Its total area
2 2
reached 922,500m . The production plant had an enclosed area of 34,262m and the rest of the built area
2
reached 185,000m , including administrative, storage, service, and socio-cultural facilities as well as housing
for administrative and technical staff and workers. 2,100 workers and 155 administrative and technical staff
were employed at the complex when it was completed in 1935. [5]
The socialist influence of the Soviet design is readable in the spatial organization and management; the
complex itself formed a metropolis, where the productive, administrative, dwelling, entertainment and training
activities were supervised by a central authority. [6] The driving style behind the design is rationalist and
functionalist. The early 1930s was a period of transformation in European Modernism and saw the end of the
avant-garde modernisms, which included utopic and heroic attempts to rebuild a revolution- and war-torn
continent and to renew the society. In U.S.S.R. all autonomous professional architectural groups were
dispersed excluding VOPRA, which was under Stalin’s control in 1932. [7] This marked the abrupt end of
Constructivism with all of its social and cultural aspects while the now state-employed architects sought a
new and politically correct rationality and standardization in their work. This, in its turn, led to a new style of
modern monumental historicist classicism, illustrated by B. Iofan’s project for the Palace of the Soviets
(1931-1933). Industrial architecture acquired a monumental classicism as well where symmetry and
monumentality overrode pure functionalism. The design of the complex in Kayseri belongs to this period of
transition, reflecting both the formal monumental classicism and the relatively informal Constructivism in its
different parts. (Figs 1, 2) For example, there are similarities to Vesnin Borthers’ “housing planning model for
Soviet industrial settlements”, which reflect the rectilinear, rationalist monumentality in classical proportions.
However, the forms as well as the life style presented with these buildings was revolutionary for a closed
vernacular urban society such as Kayseri. Many users of the houses and apartments in Kayseri emphasized
novelties such as non-stationary furniture, central heating, water, sewage and electricity systems and
geometric plans. [8] The simple, small but functional plans of these two- or three-roomed houses may be
related with the architectural tendencies and theories of the avant-garde movements of the 1920s and
1930s, such as Soviet Constructivism and the social housing schemes from the Weimar Republic like Ernst
May’s Siedlungen in Frankfurt and his theory of Existenzminimum.
In 1996, Turkey decided to cease all production activity in state factories. Kayseri Sümerbank Textile Factory
was accordingly closed down in 1999. However, the complex was kept from privatization due to the
recognition of its national significance and was allotted to Erciyes University. It was designated as a national
monument in 2003 with the effort of DOCOMOMO Turkey. Nevertheless, it was generally in ruins due to

267
Fig. 2: Turkstroj drawing showing the original layout of the Kayseri Sümerbank Textile Factory, 1932-1935. The Great
Storehouse is back center with the Repair Workshop and Foundry in front, the main Production facilities on the left and
the Power Plant on the right; the railway line is running at the centre. (Kayseri Sümerbank Textile Factory Archive)

neglect and vandalism when it was allotted to Abdullah Gul University in 2012 to be used as the urban
campus of this recently founded institution. [5, 6]

2. The Great Storehouse

The Great Storehouse, designed and constructed with the rest of the complex in 1932-1935, is located on
the western edge of the built area along the railway line. The complex was originally organized on a system
similar to a modular grid plan, and the larger buildings were located in parallel strips separated by wide
alleys. The Storehouse faces the Production Facilities (Factory) on the east and is flanked by the Repair
Workshop and Foundry on the north. (Figs 1, 2) Storehouses were added on the west, on the other side of
the railway line later in the 1960s. Despite a number of renovations, the Great Storehouse has not been
completely altered in terms of its structural system, original materials and construction technology. The only
major intervention during the life of the building has been the re-modeling of the plan and spatial lay out of
the northern section as a lunch hall for the workers in 1970. During the allocation of the complex to Erciyes
University, the southernmost section was renovated as an earthquake research laboratory for the
Department of Civil Engineering. This was a severer intervention, and not only changed the original layout of
this part of the building but also resulted in the demolition and reconstruction of some of the partition walls
and a change in the foundations. (Fig. 3) Nevertheless, the building has survived to our day with a great deal
of information concerning the building technology in the 1930s. As a crossbreed between Soviet design and
Turkish local manufacture, this is an interesting example, presenting many design principles and
construction details of its period.

2.1 The Structural System and Walls

2
The long and narrow building measuring 135x45m and 6,000m was planned as a single-storey space
divided with transversal walls. It is constructed in four sections separated with construction joints, forming a
grid of 20 axes separated into four groups of five in the north-south direction. There are no construction joints
along the width of the building in the east-west direction. The reinforced concrete skeletal system has wide
spanning axes, supported with columns 35x35cm and beams 20x35cm in section. The axes span 550cm in
the east-west direction in all of the construction sections. The span differs however in the north-south
direction. In the two northern sections, the axes span 590cm in the north-south direction while they span
800cm in the two southern sections. This situation must have been related to the type and size of the goods
stored in the different sections. The slender columns rise 5-6.5m from the original floor level excluding the
depth of the foundations. The tallest columns in the raised central nave in the north-south direction reach 9m
in height. A semi-open colonnade runs along the western side of the building facing the railway. This was
probably utilized as a loading and unloading platform for raw materials arriving and the produced goods

268
Fig. 3: The Great Storehouse, survey plan, 2012.

Fig. 4: The Great Storehouse, survey elevations, 2012.

being sent by train. (Fig. 3, 4) The reinforced concrete roof slabs between the beams are 8cm in thickness
with cantilever awnings on all sides. The pitching of the slabs in the east-west direction made the
construction of a timber roof unnecessary, and the original roof covering was composed of metal sheets as
far as it could be understood from old photographs.
The foundations are 1.30-1.45m deep from the original floor level and are composed of two layers of square
footings underneath the columns. The top footing measures 80x80cm and the bottom one 115x115cm. They
are about 35cm in thickness. There are reinforced concrete joining beams between the footings along
alternate axes, measuring 50x35cm. There are unreinforced solid concrete walls between the footings along
the axes where there are partition walls, reaching the original floor level in height. These provide a flexible
footing for the walls. The spaces between the footings are filled with earth and a simple floor is designed with
a rubble stone hard core covered with a cement finish on top, reaching 15cm in thickness. (Fig. 5)
The interior partition walls are constructed with bricks measuring 65x200x100mm. During the survey of the
building at least four different brands of original bricks have been identified. The highest quality brick among
these is marked “D.K. Büyükdere” on one face and with a bee on the other. These were probably imported
from a brick factory in Sarıyer, Istanbul. These are similar in size (except for the thickness) and shape to
“bricks, called polished of Marseille, with sunken faces” described by Raymond. [9] However the factory in
Büyükdere or the initials D. K. cannot be associated with any of the lists in Raymond or the yearbooks dated
th
to the first quarter of the 20 century. [10] The other three brands that have been identified are rougher in
appearance but similar in shape and size. These were marked with simple signs resembling mason’s marks:
“R”, “A” and “H” or “ψ”. These could not have been associated with any local or national producers either.
The exterior walls are constructed with local tuff or tufa stone and are 25cm in thickness. The stones were
cut and shaped, and left exposed on the outside but left rough on the inside, and the inside surfaces were
plastered. The courses were arranged at 24cm and 30cm height, the narrower courses corresponding to the
lintels over doors and windowsills. The building stones around Kayseri are generally named after their quarry
locations. However, it was not possible to identify the quarry in this case as most of the quarries used in the
th
first half of the 20 century are no longer in use. The building stones have been identified as andesitic tuff,
which are exceedingly common, red or brown in color, and contain scoria fragments of all sizes from huge
blocks down to minute granular dust. [11] Chemically tuffs are composed mostly of silicates (~70%) and

269
Fig. 5: The Great Storehouse, structural foundation detail, 2014. (İsttasyon Architecture)

Fig. 6: The Great Storehouse, typical section details, 2014. (İsttasyon Architecture)

aluminates (~15%); quartz, plagioclase and feldspar minerals are visible in thin sections. They are more
porous (~20-35%) compared to other types of building stone and thus have lower specific gravities (~1.50)
and thermal conductivity values. Their water absorption capacity is high (~9-16%) but so is their drying rate.
They are water-logged and soft when quarried but they harden and become lighter as they dry. In terms of
2
mechanical strength, their compressive strength (~30-35 N/mm ) is lower than that of other buildings stones
2 2
while their bending (~7 n/mm ) and shear (~-10 N/mm ) strengths are comparable with other building stones
and higher than those of limestone and travertine. [12]

270
All the masonry walls are held together with a weak mortar based on equivalent quantities of Portland
cement and lime and small sand grains (Ø < 1mm). The extreme weakness of the mortar, illustrated by its
breakability by hand, indicates that the cement did not react. The strength of the mortar is very low, and
reminiscent of that of a pure air lime mortar without any indication of hydraulic binder reaction. It was
possible that unslaked air lime was used with the cement, and that the lime absorbed all of the water in the
mortar mixture, leaving the cement grains dry and not able to react chemically. The light color of the mortar
matrix suggests that hydraulic additives such as brick or tile dust were not used. Local tuffs and volcanic
earths also show puzzolanic activity [13] although tests indicate that it is very low, and they need to be
utilized in large quantities to reach the required mechanical strengths [14]. The use of such an additive with
the air lime binder might have caused the unusual weakness of the mortar as well.
What holds the masonry units together are the steel reinforcing bars (Ø6mm) placed horizontally at 25cm
intervals within the courses between the stones and every other course between the bricks, and tied to
thicker steel bars (Ø9mm) vertically along the reinforced concrete columns. This technology has created thin
and versatile partition and exterior walls that only carry their own load. Unlike regular masonry, they also
have the tensile load bearing capacity against lateral loads like reinforced concrete elements. (Figs 6, 7)

2.2 The Architectural Elements

Natural light is provided through horizontal strip windows located in the upper part of the exterior walls.
These are 140cm in height and run along the full length of the east and west façades. The windows are
manufactured from T- and L-shaped iron strips. The height of the window is divided horizontally into two and
vertically into five equivalent sections. The glazed areas form regular rectangles measuring 65x37cm. Each
window frame composed of 5x2 glazed partitions are joined with 6cm iron strips. The windows are
continuous along the exterior walls and run in front of the columns and beams. There are special details to
ensure waterproofing at the sill and lintel levels. The window frame itself is located at a sligth angle on the
exterior façade to let water flow more easily. (Figs 8, 10) This simple framing system has few opening
casements.
There are a series of doors along the east and west façades which provided the access of goods. Nearly
each grid has an opening. The doors are also made of iron with L-shaped strips defining the edges. Those
on the west façade facing the train and loading platform are sliding hangar doors with low ramps outside.
They measure 230x230cm, have tracks both at the bottom and at the top, and are hung from large hooks
that slide along the top track. Those on the west façade have two opening wings, each measuring
220x110cm, and thus creating 220x220cm squares when closed. (Fig. 10) The doors and windows located

Fig. 7: The masonry units are held together the steel reinforcing bars placed horizontally within the courses between the
stones and every other course between the bricks; these are tied to thicker steel bars vertically along the reinforced
concrete columns. This technology has created thin and versatile partition and exterior walls.

271
Fig. 8: The Great Storehouse, typical window details, 2014. (İsttasyon Architecture)

Fig. 9: The Great Storehouse, fire alarm bells bearing the words “CΠΡΝHKΛEΡ / sprinkler” and “Москва / Moscow” in
the Cyrillic alphabet, 2014.

centrally on the north and south façades are different in shape and size. This vertically elongated
500x220cm opening was composed of windows on the top and the sides with a door opening at the center.
The whole system was closed with iron shutters, similar in design to the door wings on the east façade but
probably composed of two giant wings measuring 500x110cm. The original arrangements on the north and
south façade have not survived to our day and may only be understood from the traces on the building.
The architectural finishes are generally very simple. The reinforced concrete surfaces of the columns, beams
and the roof slab are left exposed, and there is no cladding on the cement finish floor. The brick partition
walls are plastered and so are the insides of the exterior stone walls. This plaster is also very soft and

272
probably lime based, bearing the characteristics of the mortar described above. No trace of the original
pointing mortar remains on the exterior faces of the stone walls; this was probably similar to the wall mortar
and was not very durable. Service elements like the original fire extinguishing system based on sprinklers
attached to the roof slab and with two red bells still bearing the words “sprinkler” and “Moscow” in the Cyrillic
alphabet (Fig. 9), electrical equipment such as the fuse boxes and the lighting fixtures appear as the only
decorative elements in this purely functional building.

3. Conclusion
The former Kayseri Sümerbank Textile Factory (1932-1935) designed and funded by the U.S.S.R. through
the Turkstroj trust was among the first large-scaled industrial establishments in Turkey. This was not only a
major industrial investment but also a socio-cultural one directed at the urban and economic development of
2
a provincial center in Turkey. The complex with a total area of 922,500m and a total built area reaching
2
185,000m including administrative, storage, service, and socio-cultural facilities as well as housing for
administrative and technical staff and workers, was in gigantic proportions for its period. The employees
reaching 2,500 in number meant that an increase of 10,000 for the city’s population, which was only around
70,000 in 1935 [15]. The complex itself formed a secondary center and metropolis in Kayseri, where all
required functions were housed in a self-sufficient manner.
The driving style behind the design is rationalist and functionalist but also monumental and classicist. The
early 1930s was a turning point and a period of transformation in European Modernism, and the complex
illustrates this period very well with its combination of symmetry and monumentality with functionalism and
rationalism, also including certain touches of Constructivism. The forms as well as the life style presented
with the complex were certainly revolutionary for a closed provincial urban society such as Kayseri.
The factory complex played an important role in the cultural and economic life of the city as well as the
country [3] until 1996, when Turkey decided to cease all production activity in state factories. However, the
recognition of its national significance made its preservation possible. It was allotted to Abdullah Gül
University in 2012, and has been in a period of transformation since with new functions, identifying,
preserving and highlighting its intrinsic architectural heritage values.
The Great Storehouse as well as the rest of the complex constitute an interesting case study as an early
example of large-scaled reinforced concrete construction in a provincial center for Turkish and Soviet
technological history. The details that have come out during the survey of the building in 2012-2013 as well
as the restoration process in 2014-2015 provide a formerly unknown chapter in material and construction
th
history. The laying out of these interesting features will form the foundation for a 20 century technological
history of architecture while making comparisons with other period Soviet and European examples possible.

Fig. 10: The Great Storehouse, east elevation and the high central nave.

Bibliographical References
[1] İLKİN, S. Birinci Sanayi Planı’nın Hazırlanışında Sovyet Uzmanlarının Rolü, Cumhuriyetin Harcı 2 –
Köktenci Modernitenin Ekonomik Politikasının Gelişimi. İ stanbul: İ stanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları, 2004,
p. 201-238. ISBN 9789756857656.

273
[2] BATURYOĞLU YÖNEY, N. Devlet Eliyle Modernizm: Kayseri’deki Kamu Yapıları, Kent Belleğindeki
Yerleri ve Miras Nitelikleri Üzerine Bir Değerlendirme, Kayseri’nin Yirminci Yüzyılı, B. Asiliskender, B.
Ceylan, A. E. Tozoğlu (eds), Kayseri: Abdullah Gül Üniversitesi Yayınları, 2012, p. 31-54. ISBN
9786054658008.

[3] ASİLİSKENDER, B. Cumhuriyetin İlk Yıllarında Mimaride ‘Modern’ Kimlik Arayışı: Sümerbank Kayseri
Bez Fabrikası Örneği, unpublished master’s thesis, Istanbul: Istanbul Technical University, 2002.

[4] CERVATI, R. C. Annuaire Oriental du Commerce, de l’Industrie, de l’Administration et de la Magistrature,

Constantinople, 1927; CERVATI, R. C. Annuaire Oriental du Commerce, de l’Industrie, de l’Administration et
de la Magistrature, Constantinople, 1928; Ticârî ve İktisâdî İzmir Rehberi, [reprinted from Türkiye Salon ve
İlanât Gazetesi, 1926], S. Yetkin (ed.), İzmir: İzmir Büyükşehir Belediyesi Kent Kitaplığı 28, 2002.
[5] ASİLİSKENDER, B. Erken Cumhuriyet Mirası Sümerbank Kayseri Bez Fabrikası Tehdit Altında, Arkitera
e-Bülten / Almanak 08, no. 189, 2008. ISSN 1303-6874. Web: http://v3.arkitera.com/h29424-erken-
cumhuriyet-mirasi-sumerbank-kayseri-bez-fabrikasi-tehdit-altinda.html.
[6] ASİLİSKENDER, B. From Industrial Site to University Campus: Sümerbank Kayseri Textile Factory,
DOCOMOMO Journal 49, 2013/2, Barcelona: Fundaçio Mies van der Rohe, p. 86-89. ISSN 1380-3204.
[7] COLQUHOUN, A. Modern Architecture, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002. p. 133-135. ISBN
9780192842268.

[8] ASİLİSKENDER, B. Modernleşme ve Konut: Cumhuriyet’in Sanayi Yatırımları ile Kayseri’de Mekansal ve
Toplumsal Değişim, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Istanbul: Istanbul Technical University, 2008, p. 47-48.

[9] RAYMOND, A. M. Notes Pratiques et Résumés sur l’Art du Constructeur en Turquie (Contenant 180
Croquis et 15 Planches hors Texte), Alexandrie: Typo-Lithogrphie Centrale I. Della Rocca, 1908, p. 192, Fig.
140.

[10] RAYMOND, A. M. Notes Pratiques et Résumés sur l’Art du Constructeur en Turquie (Contenant 180
Croquis et 15 Planches hors Texte), Alexandrie: Typo-Lithogrphie Centrale I. Della Rocca, 1908, p. 250;
CERVATI, R. C. Annuaire Oriental du Commerce, de l’Industrie, de l’Administration et de la Magistrature,
Constantinople, 1909, 1912, 1913, 1927, 1928; Ticârî ve İktisâdî İzmir Rehberi, [reprinted from Türkiye Salon
ve İlanât Gazetesi, 1926], S. Yetkin (ed.), İzmir: İzmir Büyükşehir Belediyesi Kent Kitaplığı 28, 2002.

[11] Web: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuff accessed on March 12, 2014.

[12] ÇORAPÇIOĞLU, K. et al. Kayseri Kırsalında Yöresel Mimari Özelliklerin Belirlenmesi 3: Rehber Kitap,
T.C. Bayındırlık ve İskan Bakanlığı Teknik Araştırma ve Uygulama Genel Müdürlüğü, İstanbul: Mimar Sinan
Güzel Sanatlar Üniversitesi Döner Sermaye İşletmesi Müdürlüğü, 2008, p. 18-22, 49-53, Table 2.1;
ÇORAPÇIOĞLU, K. et al. Kırsal Alanda Yöresel Mimari Özelliklerin Belirlenmesi 5: Proje Raporları, T.C.
Bayındırlık ve İskan Bakanlığı Teknik Araştırma ve Uygulama Genel Müdürlüğü, İstanbul: Mimar Sinan
Güzel Sanatlar Üniversitesi Döner Sermaye İşletmesi Müdürlüğü, 2008, p. 35-58, 68-73; ERGUVANLI, K., S.
MALİK, Türkiye’nin Mermerleri ve İnşaat Taşları, İ stanbul: İ stanbul Teknik Üniversitesi Maden Fakültesi,
1962, p. 132; KOZLU, H. Kayseri Yöresindeki Tarihi Harçların Karakterizasyonu ve Onarım Harçlarının
Özellikleri, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Istanbul: Istanbul Technical University, 2010, p. 50-53; YAŞAR,
E. et al. Industrial Usage of Nevşehir-Kayseri (Turkey) Tuff Stone, World Applied Sciences Journal 7 (3),
2009, p. 271-284.
[13] ÇORAPÇIOĞLU, K. et al. Kırsal Alanda Yöresel Mimari Özelliklerin Belirlenmesi 5: Proje Raporları, T.C.
Bayındırlık ve İskan Bakanlığı Teknik Araştırma ve Uygulama Genel Müdürlüğü, İstanbul: Mimar Sinan
Güzel Sanatlar Üniversitesi Döner Sermaye İşletmesi Müdürlüğü, 2008, p. 68, 72.
[14] KOZLU, H. Kayseri Yöresindeki Tarihi Harçların Karakterizasyonu ve Onarım Harçlarının Özellikleri,
unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Istanbul: Istanbul Technical University, 2010, p. 55-56, 146, 183-193, 210-
212.

[15] Web: http://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kayseri#Demografi accessed on March 20, 2015.

[16] NIKOLAEV, I. Архитектурная Типология Промышленных Предприятий (Architectural Typology of
Industrial Enterprises), Moscow: Stroyisdat, 1975 (reprinted 2002).

274
View publication stats