The client was a private sector company specializing in building materials (Pipes and fittings). The main plan was to develop office use while providing an attractive space for the visitors through design andOrganizational order apparent in the building.The main thing we wanted to achieve with the building's design was Avoiding provide an icon, but rather aimed at creating a neutral form in high density urban texture.In order to care about building context we know that Office buildings in 70-80s in Tehran had similar characters. One of great Iranian architects "Abdol Aziz Farman-Farmaian" has built two complexes in site’s neighborhood in 1970s which are considered as contemporary Iranian architecture ( Abdol Aziz Farman-Farmaian he proceeded to create one of Iran’s most important modern-day architectural legacies). We tried to use the same contemporary motifs to build a modern office building today. These motifs mainly point to simplicity and repetition in facades. This is what makes for harmony in the context.
The material is white Travertine with a hydrophobic nanomaterial cover in order to prevent damage by rain and pollution to the environment. We actually proposed a solution for using wide windows and simultaneously abiding by the limiting rules of glass area on the façade in this zone. As to their orientation, the reason was to provide the maximum shade on the façade(paicture 1 , that we take photo at afternoon and the sun direction is shown in the picture ). At their current position we have 30% more shade on the façade.
With interior design we aimed at creating a coordination between inner and outer space as well as gradual variation of materials while using the building, but reducing the variety to only 3 main materials in the design of main spaces and the furniture. Plaster is chosen as the base material for most of the spaces due to acoustic considerations. Office spaces are made from natural beech wood and white artificial wood due to hierarchical importance as well as repeating outer forms on the inside.
Having studied and analyzed major semiotics theories and their equivalent in architecture, one can come to an understanding of how people induce or bring meanings to the built forms. This method of analysis in architecture is homogenous to syntax science is “linguistics”. The main idea is that the two aspects of meaning and syntax are not completely separable in language. Therefore, it is highly important to consider the “evaluation of the semi-logical aspect”. The two major figures in the field of semiotics are Ferdinand de Saussure, Swiss philosopher and Charles Sanders Pierce, American theorist. Both of the theorists had come to the conclusion that linguistic principals are applicable to the analysis of “signification” processes in other fields.
Tehran as a city, is like a text which is engaged in and struggles with its own linguistic parts, because in the course of urban design the city has experienced rapid changes. The pre-revolution chair is crystalized and has turned into the modern nostalgia. However, the city never freezes and keeps developing out of order and program. In this structure, the smallest meaningful particle (house) forms the environment. We call this unit “pixel”. When these meaningful units are joined together, bigger groups – thus a bigger image – is formed and in the mega structure, the form of the city which is the order of environment is formed by these. The two aspects of the meaning of the city and the meaning of pixel are not separable.
A city image is resulted from a cluster system, key concepts of which are summarized in “scale”. Scale in minor to major features of the city is defined as a spectrum which lies between two ends: “legibility of the city” and “architectural approach”. Different scales represent resolutions (defined pixels) different, but part of a bigger image. There is not necessarily a contrast between resolution and variety. Variety can be pleasant, ideal and at the same time, well-defined. A city image should not be simple to the extent which imposes boredom on the mind of the viewer. Complexity and variety add excitement to city image, but this needs to remain in such a controlled level which does not twist the general resolution. One must not feel as though they have lost their general image of the city and as a result of which, disoriented.
While designing this building, the biggest challenge was to find for it the best resolution and scale. Resolution is what defines our place in the context. We avoided Iconism and sought to stay within the city pixels. Partial and total urban image of this project in minor and major scales are compatible. De-shaping, thus, has been the main goal here, which was chosen in order for the project to correspond to the existing local context, defined formerly by projects including Vanak Park Towers and Saman Complex by architect abdol-azizfarmanfarmaian.
