The winner's list of Me'mar Sixth Award 2006 for Residential Buildings was announced on 19th November. Traditionally, the award's theme alternates each year between public and private buildings. This year's projects were evaluated according to their size in three different groups: single unit and small apartments, medium-sized residential buildings, and large complexes. This year's General Advisory Committee consisted of Ahmad Azimi Bolourian, Mohsen Mirheydar, Iraj Kalantari, Kamran Shahinfar, and Kamran Afshar Naderi, who came to agreement to give the jury the freedom of defining the proportion according to which the total sum of the award (150 million Rials) would have been divided between the winners.
74 projects participated in the award, two being rejected due to their lack of proper documentation. An increase in the number of participants from provinces was visible this year. Jury members consisted of Negar Hakim (Iran), Faramarz Sharifi (Iran), Hossein Sheikh-Zeineddin (Iran), Bahram Shokouhian (Iran), and Bernard Khoury (Lebanon), who, due to Lebanon's unpredictable war and its aftermath, unfortunately could not participate in the evaluation process and was replaced with Firouz Firouz (Iran) by the General Advisory Committee.
After three eliminative and two elective rounds, the jury finally chose 20 works — 9 in Small Apartments, 6 in Medium-Sized, and 5 in the Large Complexes group — among which one work in each of the first two groups was announced as winner (each receiving 50 million Rials), and two other projects — one large complex and one renovation project — received honorary mention (30 million and 20 million Rials respectively).
Characteristics of the Selected Works
The changing nature of participants over six editions has been broadly significant. The competition has essentially become a platform for private architectural production and independent practitioners. Year by year, considering the weight of the government sector in public construction projects, the most striking observation is the notable qualitative improvement in the overall body of work compared to a decade ago. This transformation — particularly driven by young architects — indicates remarkable latent talent that, if unobstructed, will undoubtedly establish itself on the world architectural stage.
2. Traditional architecture, where it carries genuine functional and practical significance (not merely conceptual or abstract), has been meaningfully employed. Villa Shahrak Maneli (by Zavieh Group) distinctly draws upon regional northern architectural patterns — not merely for aesthetics but to address the practical challenges of wind corridors and heavy rainfall.
3. Deductive ideas responsive to project conditions clearly prevail over imported decorative approaches borrowed from prestigious international models.
4. Aesthetics are less influenced by international journalistic trends and fashions, maintaining a degree of independence.
5. Volumetric design methods — achieving spatial quality through massing rather than through plan — have become the dominant approach.
6. Works demonstrate greater courage in experimentation, with less repetitive copying of stock aesthetic formulas.
7. Interior spaces receive more attention, and the execution quality of interior architectural details has improved.
8. Aesthetics derived from structure and tectonics remain rare. Designers focus primarily on formal architectural concerns.
9. Few works address the integration of building services and architecture through design.
10. Construction execution quality has improved, and architects have paid greater attention to this matter in their designs.
How the Works are Submitted
In terms of quality of assessment and compliance with documentation requested in the call for entries, competition has significantly improved, although several submissions still lack adequate presentation. Participants provide photographs and clear documentation about spatial layouts, relationships, and building details, though video submissions of up to 100 minutes have added valuable depth to the documentation. There is still room for improvement — one must remain mindful of the visual effects employed in photographs and films. While these can be viewed positively, the Memar Award has not yet established standardized documentation requirements. The ability to identify and commission specialized architectural photographers and filmmakers remains underdeveloped.
The positive reception continues to grow. Letters arriving annually from architectural organizations and individuals have been nearly universally supportive. Beyond these successes, professional concerns at various levels — the breadth and complexity of evaluation across different scales and typologies, and balancing positive encouragement with constructive criticism across formal and informal discussions — remain ongoing challenges. Through the organizers' collective efforts, the outcome reflects the belief that, given the enormous volume of construction and development in our society, programs establishing minimum standards for architecture and sustainable construction are a social necessity that must not be diminished.
Architects and Developers
A final observation concerns the social impact of the Memar Award in connecting architects with developers. This is a particular issue deserving close attention: recognizing the importance of architecture and architectural design in construction. It is not enough that appreciation for winning architects and their designs is expressed only at the annual ceremony. Building on last year's initiative, this edition saw increased developer participation. Notably, the winning project's developer is a construction company (Developer) named Abadgostaran Mahan — a fitting and meaningful term for the construction and development industry. We welcome this growing attention to architectural quality from the private development sector. We sincerely invite our beloved readers and members of the architectural community to share their suggestions for organizing better awards in the years to come.