Officials of the Moscow City Duma denied Muscovites a referendum on expanding the capital's borders, citing the fact that Moscow is a city of federal significance. The participants in the discussion on the ageev-msk blog found this reason ridiculous, and the author of the post himself said: "The ban means that 10 trillion rubles will be withdrawn from the budget for the next utopian project." Ignoring the opinion of the residents, the authorities showed that they are ready to solve the problem in the usual voluntaristic way, quite possibly giving up the opinions of experts. “It will be difficult for them with such a city. And it's difficult to manage and, in general, to control, "- helpfokin foresees. “And under the guise of a bunch of protected and historical lands will be given to private developers, there will be set up commercial high-rises,” adds akonita. Moreover, bloggers are unanimously convinced that the main problem - decompaction of buildings and traffic - cannot be solved in this way. “Do you think the expansion of Moscow will save you from sitting on your heads? The wider it is, the greater the flow of people will pour into it”, - zoloto25 is sure.
The discussion participants see an alternative to artificial inflation of borders only in the independent development of regions. “It is possible to develop the cities of the Moscow region. It is not necessary to create one big city. It's not healthy even ecologically,”says akonita. dnevnik007 agrees: “You don’t need to spend that kind of money on decorating the capital, you need to donate it to the regions. If everything in the regions gets better, no one will get on our heads”. True, skeptics are sure that in this case the officials are guided by some logic of their own. “We are talking about building a completely separate super city for the nomenclature. This is initially a crime against dying Russia,”writes crenicichla. To do without "Big Moscow" and to increase the free space of the capital, tat_petrova suggests following the example of the Chinese - "to build above-ground complexes, and we will have a multi-level city." And vortexrikers suggested the most radical version - the terminally ill city needs to be demolished. “Only Moscow is eternal, it will be demolished in one place, it will appear in another, the political elite must live somewhere,” dnevnik007 replies.
Natalia Shustrova's blog started a discussion of the exhibition of the architect Evgeny Gerasimov that opened last week in St. Petersburg. Gerasimov is a master of expensive, high-quality architecture, beautiful details, “a brilliant interpreter of styles,” “an architect with an impeccable sense of scale,” as Shustrova writes about him. True, he adds: "Few of the architects can boast that the people sincerely love some of his buildings, and just as sincerely hate others." The opinions of commentators were also divided: someone highly appreciates the work of the architect, someone desperately criticizes him.
This week Omsk students were concerned with the problem of preserving the urban landscape, having received the task of re-profiling abandoned monuments of industrial architecture. In the ru_architect community, the user aliksumin publishes educational projects of 2nd and 3rd year students. Omsk brewery "Volochaevsky" young people suggested preserving the water tower for historical reconstruction as a multi-storey restaurant with a planetarium or a sports center with a climbing wall and a cafe; But the readers of the student community were severely criticized - not so much for the ideas embedded in the projects, but for the quality of the execution of the latter. Prussak fails everyone: “These students have spent at least a year on hillshades and blueprints and still don’t know how to express their thoughts graphically? Even if they had few thoughts, they should be able to build a perspective ?! " And he adds: "Worse, the drawings are not conceptual, that is, they do not reveal the content, but only illustrate it, and that is inept, that is, the inability to draw is joined by the inability to convey an architectural idea by architectural means."dronpavlov agrees: “The presentation is terrible! And even if we discard the non-informativeness, then even the volume that is, could have been done much better! Don't they make claus on the 2-3 course !?"
However, if the students are wrong, it means that they are learning, but the errors of the restorers can end up much sadder. In recent years, a unique wooden monument - the Transfiguration Church in Kizhi - has been under the threat of such a "methodological" error. For several years, experts have been discussing what is safer for a fairly rotten building - a complete bulkhead or restoration using a lifting method, i.e. lifting the structure on jacks. In the end, the last point of view won out, and starcom68 believes that fortunately. On his blog, he publishes fresh photos of the restoration, which show how the church is literally hung on the lifts in order to replace the decayed lower crowns.
The previous restoration, carried out in the 1980s, was, to put it mildly, unsuccessful: a foreign metal frame appeared at the base of the building. “Now restorers are trying to correct the mistakes of the past,” notes the author of the blog. mozhav, however, possesses other information: “The frame remains, the interiors are not restored, it is not supposed to“correct the mistakes of the past”. With the bulkhead of the building, this would be possible. " But starcom68 believes that it makes no sense to restore the lost interiors. He is also supported by the restorer kuusela_a: "It is likely that this frame saved the church from collapse for 30 years …" As for the bulkhead, for which some experts have not stopped agitating for several years, there are weighty arguments against it - not only that " when rolling out, the church will disappear from sight for N number of years ", so" no one takes into account the fact that a dismantled church is a huge amount of materials that need to be stored."
Unlike restorers, archaeologists cannot be fully responsible for their work, especially in a situation where artifacts cannot be removed from the ground and sent to a museum. In this case, unfortunately, the site owner disposes of the finds, who, of course, thinks about museification last. Thus, the fruits of long-term excavations of the Okhtinsky Cape can now be buried under the construction of Gazprom's facilities, and a hotel will soon appear in Kaliningrad on the site of the ruins of the ancient Konigsberg castle (near the Yunost Sports Palace). Rival88imperium reports about it in his blog. Foundations of a fortress tower and an ancient water supply were found on the site under construction. "And what, this whole beauty will be buried under the living room of the moneybags?" - pyra_vita is indignant. “On the contrary, they ought to embed“the most “delicious” moments inside the building, “sew” them into the basements, so that there was something to show the guests. Otherwise, it would turn out that the gold mine was razed to the ground … " From these excavations it would be possible to make something like an archaeological museum-reserve (to conserve, make overlaps over the excavations, build halls for exhibiting the found objects), "says kneiphof. “In a city whose history has been stripped to the bone and more? - surprised in response to mozhav. - All this - especially in Europe - is easily preserved under any new building and becomes the pride of those who built it. It’s not so difficult and not so expensive, it would be a hunt”. But, according to natti_green, the place for the hotel was sold to a Turkish company, which paid for the excavations and was looking forward to their completion, and the city is now washing its hands, especially since "it is even less worried about the preservation of the foundations than the Turks."
