Chapter 3 | The Building of Paimio Sanatoriumpartnership in a company supplying building materials.^663 It appears that Aalto was
inspired in his own business operations by the entrepreneurial approach of these two
Turku businessmen.
Attaching a structural engineer to the sanatorium project was not a foregone con-
clusion. In May 1930, the Building Board of the sanatorium discussed the designs for
the reinforced concrete structures. Although some members felt that delivering the
structural calculations should have been assigned to the contractor, the Board decided
to employ an independent engineer for the project to carry out the calculations.^664
The clerk of works, engineer Kilpi completed the structural calculations for the small
buildings and Aalto was allocated a budget of FIM 50,000 to carry out the calcu-
lations for the main building.^665 After this decision was made, Aalto commissioned
Henriksson to carry out the task.
In May 1930, the Building Board published a call for tenders and received nine bids
in the first building phase, the construction of the reinforced concrete skeleton.^666 The
Building Committee established that all the companies were financially sound, and
decided to base its decision on the most economical price. It started negotiations with
the three contractors who had submitted the least expensive bids. Ab Jernbeton Oy
(Reinforced Concrete Ltd), which shared third place in the price comparison, was left
out of the negotiations at this point. The most inexpensive bid was made by Oy Tektor
Ab.^667 Aalto started the negotiations and soon informed the Building Board that the
manager of Tektor had said that the company had not taken into account the masonry
work of the chimney, and would for this reason need to raise the bid. The Building
Board decided to accept Tektor’s revised bid of FIM 3.94 million as the least expen-
sive.^668 As a consequence, the building contractor and master builder Arvi Ahti, whose
bid had been placed fifth in the price comparison, informed the Committee that he had
made a mistake in his calculations by including the masonry work in his first bid, and
was therefore interested in lowering the price to FIM 4.075 million. The Committee
considered that Ahti’s announcement did not lead to the need for further measures to
be taken. It continued the negotiations with Tektor until it emerged that the concrete
work of the rear wall of the sun balcony was not included in their bid as it was only
presented in Aalto’s final drawings. The minutes do not reveal whether Aalto presented
new drawings or ideas during the negotiations. When no agreement was reached, the
663 Kankaanpää 1997, pp. 65–66.
664 Building Board May 3, 1930, Section 4. PSA.
665 Building Committee May 9, 1930, Section 3. PSA.
666 Bids were placed by the following companies, listed from the lowest quote to the highest: Oy Tektor Ab (FIM 3.845
million); master builder A. Löfström and entrepreneur A. Lyly (FIM 3.994 million); master builder Lauri Mattila (FIM
4.4 million); Ab Jernbeton Oy (FIM 4.4 million); master builder Arvi Ahti (FIM 4.5 million); master builder Tähtinen &
Heikinen (FIM 4.56 million); master builders K. Artukka and E. Viljanen (FIM 4.713 million); Oy Construktor Ab (FIM
4.65 million); and Huhtala, Lahti & Viljanen (FIM 4.85 million). Building Committee June 4, 1930, Section 1. PSA.
667 Two of the companies who placed a bid, Oy Tektor Ab and Constructor Ab led by Manne Muoniovaara, were
among Finland’s most notable construction firms. Rantamo 2009, pp. 96–98.
668 Building Board June 10, 1930, Section 3. PSA.