Constantly striving for the essence.

Prone to eschew fashion or trends of any kind.
Pursuits serenity.

Focuses on the (sole) core support of architecture – materiality and its pure construction design.

Considers these as grounding and embodying the discipline’s (only) possible creative tools – and, ultimately, the architect’s (specific) potential themes.

Significance, conceptualization and value come afterwards – they lie in the eye of the beholder, and not of the former.

Aspires for the essentiality and spareness of the most natural, pure and tactile materials.

Believes that each project bears the imprint of its own circumstances.
Hence, each project synthesizes a unique, unrepeatable and poetic endeavor.

Refers Japan as a defining experience in his life.
In Japan, he was guided through a line of local customs and traditions, and enlightened to their exquisite culture.
As such, he learned their evocative vision of the mundane, and the beauty of impermanence.
Ever since, he became interested in presence, and in reconciling built spaces with a sense of belonging, memory, harmony and grace.

Practices architecture as a secular discipline that, among and together with several areas of expertise, (still) possesses its own autonomy.

Although claiming that, every so often, it may reach a timeless artistic existence, he regards architecture as an “art” solely through its Greek ancient essence and meaning, the original root-word “techné” – a specific way of knowledge or “know-how”, that operates with its own specific means (or a particular (intuitive) sense, which arises from both accumulated experience and sensibility – or in other words, from both practice and theory ).

Hence, he interprets architecture as

an art of building,

an art of inhabiting –

and, ultimately,

an art of living.