Isias Hotel indictment reveals licensing anomaly

Isias Hotel indictment reveals licensing anomaly

ADIYAMAN

The indictment for the Grand Isias Hotel in Adıyaman, which tragically collapsed during the Feb. 6 earthquakes in Türkiye’s south, killing 72 people, including 26 volleyball players from Turkish Cyprus, has uncovered a startling detail: The hotel was licensed as a "residence."

In the indictment prepared by Adıyaman Chief Public Prosecutor's Office and accepted by the court, 11 defendants, five of whom were arrested, including hotel owner Ahmet Bozkurt, are charged with "causing death and injury to more than one person with conscious negligence." Turkish Cypriot Prime Minister Ünal Üstel was named as a complainant on behalf of his nation in the indictment.

The indictment stated that the building's license, which was obtained on Jan. 5, 1993, as a "residence," was changed to "hotel" on Nov. 8, 2001, and that the architectural project of the building was prepared with a total of 13 floors, whereas, the license was issued for nine floors.

In the expertise report prepared by the Civil Engineering Department of Karadeniz Technical University, it was stated that the quality of the concrete was significantly low and the thickness of the iron used was far below the standard.

It was also emphasized that no ground survey had been conducted and that sand from the river, which is prohibited for construction purposes, was used in the building.

The indictment also pointed out that there was no ground report, static calculation report, or static project for the building and highlighted a mismatch in the number and size of the structural system elements in the survey and project, as well as insufficient reinforcement detailing.

According to the indictment, which highlighted deficiencies regarding the stirrup spacing, hook properties, lap lengths, anchorage and clamping lengths of the columns and beams, reinforcement detail deficiencies may be one of the reasons for the collapse of the building. It was also determined that the concrete compressive strengths did not meet the necessary conditions.