Contemporary Architecture

Jury Report — The Grand Memar Award 2005

Jury Report — The Grand Memar Award 2005

The 5th round of Memar Awards were granted on November 11, 2005. This year's prizes were devoted to public buildings, excluding healthcare facilities and small businesses. Forty-four projects competed for the awards.

A council of distinguished architects and construction experts advised the jury on matters of policy. The councilors included Nezameddin Nizam Ameri, Moises Mahyardad, Behzad Kamrava, and Kavous Shahrotin.

Policy Council Statement

The policy document drafted by the councilors addressed three key issues:

1. Identity in Architecture: The question of identity in architecture has been much debated in Iran. Climatic considerations and energy conservation inevitably create distinctive aspects in contemporary Iranian architecture compared with other regions. The jurors' appreciation of such considerations can greatly contribute to highlighting issues of particular climatic character.
2. Building on Heritage: Iran is home to a rich legacy of structures — residences, mausoleums, temples, bridges, workshops, and public facilities — whose historical architectures maintain artistic value while serving their original purpose. Architects should be provided with recognition and opportunities to contribute to this tradition.
3. Urban Context: One of the reasons for the most conspicuous anomalies in urban appearance is the lack of attention by architects and builders to the immediate surroundings of buildings. The jurors' appreciation of contextual sensitivity can promote this indispensable notion.
◆ ◆ ◆

The Jury

Behrouz Ahmadi, juror of the 5th Memar Award
Behrouz Ahmadi
Architect, Iran
Kamran Afshar Naderi, juror of the 5th Memar Award
Kamran Afshar Naderi
Architect, Iran
Hadi Tehrani, juror of the 5th Memar Award
Hadi Tehrani
Architect, Germany
Nasrin Seraji, juror of the 5th Memar Award
Nasrin Seraji
Architect, France
Mehdi Alizadeh, juror of the 5th Memar Award
Mehdi Alizadeh
Architect, Iran

Judging Process

The judging methodology consisted of a three-phase elimination process. In the first two phases, the five jurors independently reviewed all 44 submissions, forming their own assessments before convening to eliminate 19 projects based on overall quality and adherence to the award criteria. Twenty-five projects advanced to the third phase.

In the third phase, the remaining projects were evaluated more closely through group discussion, with jurors debating architectural merits, construction quality, and contextual sensitivity. After further deliberation, 12 projects advanced to the final selection. The jury then conducted a scoring session where each juror independently ranked the finalists, with placement determined by aggregate scores.

Juror Perspectives

Kamran Afshar Naderi: "The initial phases in any award naturally require courage. When you observe the work of colleagues who have participated in the competition, you first encounter a few works that inevitably attract your attention, and then you must work backward from there to eliminate."
Behrouz Ahmadi: "After the first phase, 9 or 10 works from the remaining 40 projects caught my attention. In the next phase, having seen the projects and studied the boards more carefully, my attention went to the details and execution quality."
Hadi Tehrani: "The main problem in reviewing these works was that we still sometimes saw ordinary construction-level works in the portfolios of selected architects. The gap between the designed plan and the final built form is something that should be addressed."
Nasrin Seraji: "Despite my concerns, I must say the overall quality was better than I expected. Looking at the buildings, one can see that the standard of construction has improved. Some architects have created quite remarkable work."
Mehdi Alizadeh: "In the second phase, I became more precise in my evaluations. I tried to examine the relationship between the plans, the sections, and what we could observe from the photographs, to understand how well the design intentions were carried through to the built work."
◆ ◆ ◆

Winners

PlaceProjectArchitect / FirmCity
1stFurniture Showroom & WarehouseMohammad Majidi / BonsarTehran
2ndTehran Telemetry & Telecontrol CenterSam Tehranchi / Design Core [4S]Tehran
3rdPopli Khalatbari Vocational SchoolBahram Shekourian / Padiav ParthTehran
4thGolshahr Urban Railway StationFarzad Rouzbeh / HamgroohKaraj
5thPool & Recreation CenterArash Mozafari & Arshia SholehSari
5thPajang Khodro Main OfficeZand Harirchi / Harirchi ArchitectsTehran
Mohammad Majidi receiving 1st place award at the 5th Memar Award ceremony
Mohammad Majidi, 1st place winner, receiving the award
Sam Tehranchi receiving 2nd place award at the 5th Memar Award ceremony
Sam Tehranchi, 2nd place winner
Bahram Shekourian receiving 3rd place award at the 5th Memar Award ceremony
Bahram Shekourian, 3rd place winner
Farzad Rouzbeh receiving 4th place award
Farzad Rouzbeh, 4th place
5th place winners at the Memar Award ceremony
Zand Harirchi and Arash Mozafari & Arshia Sholeh, shared 5th place
◆ ◆ ◆

Tribute to Abdolaziz Farmanfarmaian

The ceremony also featured a special tribute to the pioneering architect Abdolaziz Farmanfarmaian for his lifetime contributions to Iranian architecture. A collection of historical photographs spanning his remarkable career was presented, tracing his journey from childhood through his education in France and his distinguished career in Iran.

Tribute to Abdolaziz Farmanfarmaian at the 5th Memar Award
A tribute to Abdolaziz Farmanfarmaian at the 5th Grand Memar Award 1384

Sponsors

The 5th Grand Memar Award ceremony was supported by Altek, Bonsar, Knauf, and Superpipe International.