The second Grand Me'mar Award for post-revolution residential architecture, sponsored by Superpipe International, was declared in August 2002. Any architect who designed a post-revolution residential building in which artistic values, engineering knowledge, and construction technology were combined in the service of family economy, health, safety, convenience, and beauty of the living environment — and which contributed to urban architecture — was welcome to participate. The buildings needed to have been in use for at least two years. The deadline for entries was December 11th and the announcement of results was January 17th.
The Jury
The jury, consisting of Mehdi Alizadeh, Hadi Mirmiran, Ali Akbar Saremi, Kambiz Nazeramoo, and Kamran Afshar Naderi, prepared guidelines for the assessment of the designs prior to the receiving and evaluation phase. In these guidelines, the residential buildings were grouped into four categories: single and two-family houses; two to five story buildings; houses with more than five stories; and large complexes. The jury also agreed on a step-by-step method of design ranking, selecting five top designs and sorting them.
Jury Guidelines
The jurors believe that due to differing conditions, the significance of values differs in each of the four groups, making comparison by uniform criteria impossible. At the same time, our cities need exemplary models with the highest potential for emulation. The detailed guidelines adopted by all five jurors are as follows:
- Regarding key values in housing architecture, the jurors believe there is no particular priority for integrating one value with others. In evaluating each work, jurors are asked to keep in mind not only the values they deem important in their own right, but also whether the work is worthy of dissemination and promotion.
- All works are displayed together before the jurors, so that works unanimously rejected by all five jurors may be set aside. If even a single juror votes to keep a work, it will not be eliminated.
- Elimination continues until no more than one-fifth of total works remain.
- Remaining works are separated into the four residential categories.
- Each juror announces five preferred top designs without ranking, stating reasons for selection. Designs not selected by any juror are eliminated. Remaining designs are ordered by total votes received.
- For final rankings (first to fifth), each juror assigns scores from one to ten. Scores are summed to determine placement. In case of ties, scoring is repeated with scores from one to fifteen.
- The jury statement is drafted based on recorded remarks, reviewed and signed by all five jurors in a single session, then provided to the Memar Nashr Institute.
Values of Residential Architecture
In addition to formulating the guidelines, extensive discussions about judging criteria and the values of residential architecture took place during the pre-judging sessions. These conversations touched on fundamental questions about the relationship between architecture and housing, the role of economics in shaping residential design, the distinction between architectural innovation and practical housing solutions, and the legacy of modernism in residential construction.
Ali Akbar Saremi: Holding these competitions can itself be an educational panel. As is the case in some other arts — in cinema, poetry, and literature — there exists a continuous current of criticism. In architecture, this is not the case. Right now, for people like myself who teach at university, judging student work and explaining its foundations is extremely difficult.
Kambiz Nazeramoo: If we assume the objectives of the Grand Award are to encourage architects toward proper professional activity, to introduce accomplished efforts and suitable design models to society, and to raise public expectations and taste — we should keep these objectives in mind when judging.
Kamran Afshar Naderi: Since our subject is residential buildings, we should pay more attention to technical issues and matters of comfort, hygiene, and safety. But various issues of hygiene, safety, and comfort are only important when they become design issues.
Mehdi Alizadeh: I do not agree that we should list criteria in this way. The abundance of factors under review is itself good. Abundance is always conducive to peace, and its result is flexibility.
The jurors engaged in a far-reaching discussion about the fundamental nature of residential architecture. Afshar Naderi argued that throughout history, the builders of monumental architecture — pyramids, cathedrals, mosques — were different from those who built houses. Housing was always a local matter characterized by continuity and evolution rather than innovation. Mirmiran emphasized that in housing, the economic and technical factors are paramount, noting that even great architects like Gropius and Le Corbusier struggled when they ventured into mass housing. Saremi brought attention to the importance of function in housing and the unresolved challenge of truly understanding functionalism in Iranian architecture.
Afshar Naderi: Architecture is one thing and a good building is another. An architect is like someone who discovers the cure for a disease, and a good builder is like a good family doctor. The history of architecture is the story of those who have added something to architectural knowledge.
Mirmiran: Architecture today has become elitist; modern architecture did not have this fault. Modern architecture considered solving the world's problems its duty.
Nazeramoo: The issue is that we transform our intuitive judgment into an explainable judgment and selection.
Saremi: In today's conditions, house means function. We in these sixty years still have not understood functionalism, which is the foundation of architecture.
The discussion also explored the economic forces shaping Iranian housing, from the early development of row houses in Yusef Abad to the emergence of high-rise apartments. Mirmiran traced the evolution of housing typologies in Tehran, arguing that economic factors — not social ideals — drove the transformation. The jurors debated the influence of Western housing models on Iranian living patterns, the challenge of apartment living versus traditional courtyard houses, and the need for building codes that balance individual expression with urban harmony.
The Judging
The judging began on the morning of Thursday, Azar 28 (December 19, 2002), with all five jurors present, at the Iranian Artists' House, and continued until late. One hundred projects entered the competition, numbered 101 to 200, of which seven were disqualified due to non-conformity with the competition subject or incomplete documentation, leaving 93 projects before the jury.
Through the step-by-step method established in the guidelines, the jury studied the works carefully in three lengthy sessions on December 19th, 22nd, and 28th. In the first session, works were reviewed and those receiving at least one juror's vote advanced. By the second session, 20 works were selected as the jury's preferred designs. Each juror then chose five top works without ranking — eight works receiving no votes were eliminated, leaving twelve. Of these, four received three or more votes and eight received one or two votes.
The jurors then engaged in detailed discussions about the eight works with insufficient votes, each advocate presenting arguments to elevate their preferred projects. After extensive deliberation, a re-vote was taken, and works 102, 104, 105, 133, 159, and 187 advanced to final ranking. A summary of the jury's deliberations on individual works follows.
Jury Deliberations on Individual Works
Work No. 136 — Building No. 24, Reza Ali-Abadi
Mirmiran: I chose 136 because of the materials and very good management of details.
Saremi: In my opinion, it is exactly Louis Kahn's 1962 project for a sports center — the "service and served" discussion. He later converted the same four-part plan into a house in '68 and '69. This work is a good reference, but its time has somewhat passed.
Afshar Naderi: This project shows how with basic local materials one can raise an aesthetic discussion. Its tendency is brutalist architecture. A kind of vernacular architecture — some architectures can only raise one important point.
Nazeramoo: This project has used modulation but dealt with it incompletely. The sub-modules haven't properly responded to the sizes needed by the spaces.
Works No. 187 and 110 — Pars and Manzarieh Complexes, Daryoush Shahnavaz
Mirmiran: I chose this work because of its interesting use of the land form. It has used explicit geometry. From the outside orderly, from the inside undulating toward the central space.
Nazeramoo: Five residential complexes participated. It would have been very good if one could be among the top five. Project 110 has addressed the corridor problem by creating courtyard-like spaces on its floors.
Saremi: I consider 110 a good example that, if repeated and continued, could be a successful work.
Work No. 154 — Kordan House, Firouz Firouz
Afshar Naderi: I am not generally in favor of traditional and historicist projects. But this project, though not according to the rules, is very poetic. It alludes to history without being superficial. The contrast between thin horizontal beams and other elements is profoundly Iranian — both familiar and unfamiliar.
Mirmiran: It has a clear idea managed to the end — specific character harmonious with its environment. One of the good works of this competition.
Saremi: For such a small house, there is a bit of excess. It is unrepeatable and among the good works of Kordan, but cannot serve as a model.
Alizadeh: This project's attention to life is interesting. Those pipes are beautiful — ties for hanging clothes — meaning thinking about life. But it has gathered everything in one place.
Work No. 161 — Malkar Villa, Rashid Khomarlou
Afshar Naderi: Despite not being large, it has created interesting interior spaces. Good fitting of volumes. Full use of windows and views.
Nazeramoo: Problems with too many windows, the entire land covered with no shared public space, roof slopes oriented incorrectly for the northern region.
Alizadeh: Both this and project 102 attracted me for their industrial character. But the monotonous lining up of villas without variety in arrangement is a flaw.
Works No. 150 and 133 — Elahiyeh Residential Buildings, Behrouz Bayat
Nazeramoo: The most important merit is maintaining the north-south axis for lighting and ventilation. Good combination of brick, cement, and wood in the facade.
Mirmiran: Both belong to the same designer and are adjacent. One deserves a place among the top five. Skill and maturity characterize both, but I prefer 133.
Afshar Naderi: 133 is very much a house — a good example of an urban apartment house that can serve as a model.
Alizadeh: Project 150's greatest virtue is the north-south channel that evacuates air from all rooms and the properly placed service ducts.
Work No. 101 — Lavasan Villa, Bahram Shokouhian
Alizadeh: This project has all the virtues whose absence I criticized in project 150 — air channels on two sides make it a superb apartment.
Afshar Naderi: It is very good but doesn't have enough merit to replace other projects. It has viewed apartments spatially on different levels and organized the land well.
Nazeramoo: In Lavasan with extraordinarily beautiful nature, the formal facade work has caused the view of the dam not to be fully utilized.
Work No. 105 — Sadri Residence, Isfahan — Ghane'i and Sheykholeslam (Winner: 1st Place)
Alizadeh: What I call "spacing" can be seen here. The design constantly places people facing each other — like our old traditional houses. The fabric interweaves. Three very large tunnels with subdivisions — a new and original division. It takes great skill to achieve this on a 71-square-meter plot.
Saremi: The fundamental discussion is a critical approach. This is the kind of architecture that can be path-breaking. This work, with its planning approach and spaces, is far more advanced than work that is merely beautiful — it has a critical perspective on architecture.
Afshar Naderi: The project has organized the entire land. The elongation has been valued. There is a change of scale — the designer has brought urban space organization into the project. In this limited and narrow plot, a very rich and complex space has been created.
Mirmiran: The crack has not turned it into two buildings — it is a building of solid and void spaces. If we posit an essence for the Iranian house, this house comes close to that essence.
Work No. 104 — House of Navvab Safavi, Isfahan — Ghane'i and Sheykholeslam (Winner: 3rd Place)
Afshar Naderi: The idea is also the corridor, but unlike the previous project, details have developed decorative tendencies. Among the very good works of the competition.
Mirmiran: The project's purpose is adding a salon and pool in an old building's courtyard. The placement is excellent. The combination of pool with salon and the half-level enhance it.
Saremi: Before the colors and glazes, this was an ordinary duplex. The work done has made it beautiful. But the previous project possessed spatial values even before plastering.
Work No. 102 — House No. 3, Shiraz — Mehrdad Iravanian (Winner: 4th Place)
Mirmiran: Bold use of different materials — from unfinished wood to modern metal sheets. The courage with these elements is worthy of admiration. But unfortunately, an ordinary plan from about forty years ago with no purposeful spatial organization.
Saremi: This combination of materials dates back to the 1970s — like Frank Gehry's 1970 house. That playfulness is no longer novel.
Afshar Naderi: This is a conceptual art project. This architect is among the few who have their own personal style — constant discovery and experimentation.
Alizadeh: The message is drawing attention to industry. Others can apply this courage of using materials in the right direction.
Work No. 133 — Elahiyeh Residential, Behrouz Bayat (Winner: 2nd Place)
Mirmiran: A conventional project, but all parts are connected. Facade, plan, and spaces are of one kind. Within its method, everything is complete and flawless.
Afshar Naderi: A good urban apartment complex — an urban model that can be disseminated across the city. Many spaces created, not only interior. It approaches an identity that might be called Tehran architecture.
Saremi: Among the houses of the last forty to fifty years in Tehran, a very successful work. Urban architecture that can become widespread — humble architecture with no claim to being new.
Nazeramoo: The gradual growth from the ground — becoming lighter and more transparent as it goes higher. One of the enduring principles of Iranian architecture, skillfully employed here.
Work No. 159 — Kamraniyeh Residential Complex, Faramarz Sharifi (Winner: 5th Place)
Mirmiran: A flawless project with a pleasant central space. A suitable model for Iran. But I expect more creativity from architecture — this work has no outstanding architectural idea.
Nazeramoo: When architecture succeeds in allocating twenty-five percent of space — worth two million tomans per square meter — as breathing space, how commendable. Plans designed with complete precision; no wasted space.
Saremi: Old-fashioned architecture in details and volumes, but a good, reasonable, and humble work.
Afshar Naderi: A pleasant work. Nothing distinctive, but the pleasantness and skills employed have made it stand out.
Determining the Winners
With the conclusion of the discussions, works 102, 104, 105, 133, 159, and 187 were selected for final ranking. Each juror distributed scores from 1 (lowest) to 6 (highest) among the six works, with the lowest-scoring work automatically excluded. After final scoring, the five winners were determined.
Winners of the 2nd Grand Me'mar Award
- First Place: Sadri Residence, Isfahan — Mohammad Reza Ghane'i and Ali Sheykholeslam
- Second Place: Elahiyeh Residential Building, Tehran — Behrouz Bayat
- Third Place: House of Navvab Safavi, Isfahan — Mohammad Reza Ghane'i and Ali Sheykholeslam
- Fourth Place: House No. 3, Shiraz — Mehrdad Iravanian
- Fifth Place: Kamraniyeh Residential Complex, Tehran — Faramarz Sharifi
Award Ceremony
The award ceremony was held on 27 Dey 1381 (January 17, 2003) at Abgineh Hall. Soheila Beski, Executive Director of the Memar Nashr Institute, presented a report on the competition and announced the 20 selected designs. Seyyed Reza Hashemi, Managing Director of the Memar Nashr Institute, then delivered a speech. Mehrdad Yousefi, Managing Director of Superpipe International, addressed the guests. Finally, the jury spokesperson, Engineer Seyyed Hadi Mirmiran, announced the five winning designs.
The first-place winner received the Memar Award medal, a sum of 100 million rials, and a certificate of appreciation. Winners of second through fifth places received certificates of appreciation. Additionally, Superpipe's special prize for the use of the radiant floor heating system (50 million rials) was presented to the Cultural Heritage Organization's Pardisan Project, in recognition of the Organization's efforts in preserving Iran's historic architecture.
Sponsor: Superpipe International — Mehrdad Yousefi, Managing Director
Venue: Abgineh Hall, Tehran
Date: 27 Dey 1381 / January 17, 2003
Jury Spokesperson: Hadi Mirmiran
Website: www.memar-award.com (launched for the occasion)
Speech by Mehrdad Yousefi
Managing Director of Superpipe International, Sponsor of the Grand Memar Award 81
The Superpipe International factory began operations in Khordad 1376 (June 1997) in the Qeshm Free Zone with 18 personnel. The product we manufacture is considered the latest pipe production technology in the world. The machinery and technical knowledge belong entirely to Germany — the company Uponor. Today, that small group has grown into a large family that, in addition to 130 employees, encompasses sales representatives and contractors.
We are the first manufacturer of composite pipes in the Middle East. In all our products, we have been the first to market. We received the first ISO 9000 certificate in the country's free zones, the Gold Star of Quality from Geneva 2000, and the Commercial Credit Award from Paris 2001. We have been recognized as the top exporter of the country's free zones.
Our greatest honor is the trust of the country's engineering community in us and the installation of more than six million meters of pipe in thousands of projects throughout the country. Our slogan is "The Choice Is Yours" — meaning we believe our product variety should allow customers to choose according to their needs, and we know it is ultimately the customer who chooses.
Why are we here? We have a product manufactured at high standards. Rarely does anyone install Superpipe in a low-quality building. Construction is a chain — any action that strengthens any link and raises the standard of residential construction from design through completion, we too will be more successful. This is our connection with architecture as one of the most important links in this chain.
We believe that "good architecture is the first condition for good housing." Mechanical issues are properly resolved when considered at the design stage. Radiant floor heating is very common in Europe and we offer it as a complete package — from design through execution. We have experience executing tens of thousands of square meters, including heating the grass of Azadi Stadium, combining with solar energy in Shiraz, and numerous historic buildings being restored under the Cultural Heritage Organization's supervision.