The healthy private interest

In December 2009 the construction company Sofbuild had organized an invited competition in order to select an architect for its new mixed-use housing block. The investor had the healthy private interest to obtain an ultimate financial result through quality design

Text Antonie Manolova
Projects by I/O architects and AEDES studio

The Bulgarian architectural offices I/O architects and AEDES studio were invited to the competition. Both had been among the nominated entrants for the 2009 Mies Van der Rohe architectural award of the EU. The submitted projects were positively different both from the architectural milieu in Bulgaria and between themselves. Let us hope that their style does not transform into a mannerism in time. The architects, who have talent and work in Bulgaria, do have a choice: to continue their development, or to allow themselves be appreciated for only a tenth of their potential.

In this competition, the winner was AEDES studio. Any human choice has its mystical component, that cannot be explained. The explainable reasons for Plamen and Rossitza Bratkovi’s project to be favoured are, that it is better aligned with the mindset of the investor on the subject of modern luxury. The site is one of the best housing locations in Sofia, after all. There is a Baroque contrast between the reserved material language and the spatial composition in their project. Again the stairway atrium appears, as in Jaclyn, only now it stands in front of a brickwall background. But before anything bad happened, the architects were rescued by their sense of good measure, well tamed after a series of larger scale projects.

The strategy of AEDES was to undisputedly influence the future user on the subject of “how to arrange his furniture” and not because the furniture was marked in the drawings, but because of the fact that the spatial folds in the apartments suggested the most comfortable arrangements.
For the consumer who seeks an instant and satisfactory solution, that is an unexpected advantage.

In the project of I/O architects the subject is compactness and effectiveness. The result is an elegant volume, carefully situated in the environment. I suspect that building this project might be cheaper, as well. In Georgi Katov and Vjara Zheljazkova’s project the apartment modules are orthogonal (with a few exceptions) and allow variations in zoning. The paradox of a strict space allowing for functional diversity is attractive to a certain category of clients, capable of creation and improvisation within their habitat.
Technically, the inhabitants converse with the park because most apartments have an open viewing angle towards the greenery, and the wide glazed terraces improve the comfort of the expensive flats. Owing to the narrowed facade towards the boulevard along the Western border of the site, the traffic noise is avoided. Only, I would probably not enjoy a game of tennis on a subterranean lot with a strong shadow pattern.

Both projects are strong and decisive in acquiring their position on the site, and every one has its poetic theme – for AEDES it is heroic, and for I/O architects – discreet liberty.
I start nurturing hopes that after this competition, private contests will have to jump over a higher bar, and the result would be smarter buildings with better response to the human needs.