Hafeziyeh Guesthouse — Construction and Materials

In the Construction and Industry section, we have addressed the Hafeziyeh Guesthouse — the residence for heads of Islamic countries. Among the distinguishing features of this project that prompted Memar to examine it in depth is the high quality of execution within a relatively short timeframe (approximately two years), at a cost of roughly three million tomans per square meter — a very reasonable figure that speaks of a powerful and efficient organizational effort.

In a conversation with those involved in the execution of the project — Engineer Jalal Sadeghi, project executor and construction director; Engineer Mohammad Javad Esmaeilpour, project manager; Engineer Mohammadreza Movahhehi, workshop supervisor; and Engineer Malihossadat Karimi Paydar, building equipment director — we asked them to describe the management methods and organizational approaches to execution, and how they achieved the desirable quality that is considered an achievement for the country's construction industry.

The principal reason for the formation of the Special Buildings Executor within the Organization for Construction of Government and Public Buildings at the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development was that certain government projects had specific challenges that made their execution through conventional means — in accordance with current regulations and standard price lists — impossible. The restoration of the Parliament Building, due to the sensitivity of the subject and the historical importance of the structure; the Quran Museum and Negarestan Cultural Center, due to the technical complexities of their structures and the necessity of using special materials — these were among such projects.

The Hafeziyeh building was not only notable for the special conditions of its use — hosting high-ranking foreign government guests — but also because it had to be simultaneously designed and executed within a very short period. At the beginning of the Hafeziyeh construction, given the importance of its function, we knew we had to build a structure that would meet international standards in quality and could, in a sense, fill the gap in the construction of refined and high-quality buildings in recent decades.

Our short timeframe for simultaneous design and execution itself created particular challenges. The most important of these was that we could no longer follow the conventional methods of government construction. I believe that in some cases the design is not thoroughly reviewed under the usual system. Moreover, the sensitivity of the work — despite our belief in the very good and appropriate architectural design — due to the lack of time for corrections, necessitated that we form expert committees to review various components of the design during execution. This committee held approximately seventy sessions over the course of the project, the last one just two weeks before handover and the start of operations.

We began the project with site preparation, and as the general outlines of the work became defined during the process, the organization of work and personnel began in earnest. A critical factor from day one was the development of the project schedule — a schedule with an absolutely fixed, definite, and certain end date. Therefore, any delay in the execution of any part of the program, for whatever reason, had to be quickly compensated in the next phase.

The project schedule was not a static program but a completely dynamic one. These adjustments occurred approximately once a week. My main duties consisted of organizing the workforce, launching multiple parallel work streams, executing operations outside the scheduled timeframe to compensate for subsequent shortfalls, and deploying specialist and dedicated personnel who — beyond personal interests — were motivated by matters such as national pride and the defense of engineering capability.

Due to my responsibility in the workshop, I was more involved than other colleagues with the details. Our field of activity presented particular challenges, primarily related to the speed of design work and decision-making about execution details, the precision of which was not possible through conventional methods during design review. For this reason, during the course of work, it was sometimes announced that the specifications of work we had completed and were pleased with were incorrect and had to be changed.

One important characteristic of the executive management was the discipline and order governing the workshop, which itself contributed to raising the quality level. The proper utilization of individual and group skills of human resources — engineers, technicians, skilled workers, and even laborers — through planning and direction, along with multiple groups working in parallel according to a pre-established policy, allowed us to alleviate some of the pressure.

Building equipment is the final link in completing a structure. This aspect of the work, which is typically neglected in Iran, is so important that it can completely undermine the functionality and aesthetic qualities of the architectural design. In the Hafeziyeh building, due to its special function, this aspect of design also received attention — albeit belatedly.

Based on the client's directive, the building's equipment had to be furnished using the skills and capabilities of Iranian industry. The vision was that whatever was produced domestically should be elevated in quality, and through working with Iranian manufacturers and factories, a showcase of the finest products would be created. The diversity of spaces — guest rooms, presidential suites, hallways, restaurants, conference halls, sports facilities, meeting rooms, and gardens — each required separate specifications and studies.

Before answering the question of how such a young team accomplished this work, allow me to mention the projects we have executed: Tehran Sina Hospital dormitories (16,000 sq m), the Lahijan project in Rasht (18,000 sq m), Ahvaz Shahid Baghaei Grand Hospital (25,000 sq m), Abadan Taleghani Hospital (24,000 sq m), Khorramshahr Al-Zahra Hospital (5,700 sq m), Abadan Midwifery Faculty (12,000 sq m), and the Hafeziyeh building itself — collectively totaling well over 190,000 square meters.

All of these projects were executed on a direct-labor basis — meaning the team played the full role of contractor. The office was at the workshop, not at the Ministry headquarters. The management and catering of Hafeziyeh during the summit was also entrusted to this team, and a building in which construction workers had been working just days before was brought to full operational status, hosting 24 delegations and high-ranking world figures.

The driving force behind this project was its executive management — a manager who attended to all details and fine execution matters with precision. A specific goal was set: what we build must be better than everything that has been built before. The best example is the stone cornices and floor stones, which are perhaps unprecedented at this scale in Iran.

The architect's wish was for the facade to be stone but without the polish and shine of stone. The usual practice of bush-hammering the stone often produces uneven and unsatisfactory results. The new method — flame-finishing the stone surface — was employed here for the first time in the country. A machine was imported from Italy: essentially a torch that moves across the stone and cracks two to three millimeters of the surface, removing the polish and creating inimitable colors. At the beginning, 19 out of 20 flame-finished stones would be rejected, until eventually the skill was mastered.

For the molded stone cornices, special machines were designed and built on site, enabling the production of precisely uniform stones in large quantities — something impossible by hand carving. The facade stone was also installed without mortar for the first time, using metal clips in the manner of advanced countries. This method proved much faster and was unaffected by adverse weather conditions.

Regarding wood: in Tehran's climate of cold winters and hot summers, the use of wood for windows was not common practice. The architect, Mr. Sheikh Zeineddin, insisted on wooden windows. The team adopted the method used in advanced countries: extracting the sap from heavy woods such as oak in kilns, transforming the wood into an inert material suitable for doors and windows. This process was carried out in Iran for the first time.

For tiles, rather than approaching traditional tile makers, the team commissioned a young group from Shiraz — graduates of ceramics from the Faculty of Fine Arts — who fire traditional Iranian designs and patterns with modern technology, using industrial ceramic glazes instead of the old lead glaze, resulting in greater durability and finer detail suitable for close viewing.

In summary, in the construction of the Hafeziyeh building, the team succeeded in the following — some of which were entirely novel in the Iranian construction industry:

1) Use of various advisory councils for guidance and quality improvement of works.
2) Use of an interior designer for interior design — simultaneous with architectural execution.
3) Introduction of several new methods in the construction industry.
4) Employment of new techniques for the production of traditional materials, including kiln-dried wood, industrial-grade tile glazes, and flame-finished stone.
5) Quality improvement of a large number of domestic products to international standards.
6) Setting a new record in the use of stone materials in a building of this standard and quality.