"Advocates of Post-Modern Architecture claim that it communicates desired meanings to the public. They discuss the pluralistic values that the architect must satisfy. For those with an interest in architecture that communicates desirable meanings to the public, empirical study of the meaning inferred from styles can be helpful. This research examined the connotative meanings laypersons infer from various apartment styles and whether or not architects share public meanings. A hypothetical façade was drawn in eight different stylistic variations and these representations were used as test tools. These variations were: 1. "modern" (international style), 2. "late modern", 3. "populist" and 4. "post-modern" with a) metaphysical, b) vernacular, c) Classical-Ottoman, d) Western Neo-Classical, and e) Late-Ottoman (First National Period). In sum, this research considered the following questions with regard to symbolic meanings of styles in apartment houses: 1. Do architect academicians, practicing architects and laypersons share common meanings in relation to apartment styles? 2. Do architects see different meanings from the public? Differences in meaning emerged between architects, academicians and the public. Architect and academicians agreed upon the most disliked styles which in this case were: 1. the neo-classical of Western origin, 2) the populist with no precision, 3) the Late-Ottoman with strong centralist connotations. However they differed in their rankings of the liked. Where the academicians favored the post-modern styles with 1) metaphysical, 2) Classical-Ottoman emphases, the practicing architects preferred the post-modern with vernacular emphasis and the modern style (international style). Laypersons on the other hand showed definite preference for modern style and rejected totally the post-modern with metaphysical emphasis. That architects differ from the public in what they prefer in architecture is once more confirmed."