It must be admitted that the participants in the competition received a rather tough terms of reference. It is possible that, therefore, the projects turned out to be very similar in places. The list of "ecological" solutions has already become, to some extent, typical: solar energy, thermal heating, collection of "gray" water, natural ventilation, recoverable (and decomposable) materials, the competent use of insulation. All this is in the projects, although only experts will probably be able to assess the depth of the ecological intention and the "activity" of the house based on the brief annotations on the tablets. What they are doing (two-stage judging determined 11 nominees, on February 28, after the defense of the projects, the jury will name the main winner).
The second reason for the similarity between the projects was the requirement to take into account traditions and climatic conditions. It made pitched roofs almost inevitable (however, architects who design private houses have long called flat roofs in our climate nothing more than delirium). Further, as soon as the contestant delves into the context a little further, there is a stove with a chimney and three village windows. But it is obvious that not all traditions are to taste - it is easy to feel how some of the authors are burdened by pitched roofs and they strive to be a little original.
Another feature that united almost all the favorite projects (this was also noted by the jury) is the attention to lighting and the arrangement of windows. Almost everyone uses skylights on pitched roofs, illuminating the interiors from above (however, this is natural, because one of the organizers is Velux, the manufacturer of such windows). Everyone is concentrating on the cardinal points, fencing off from the north by utility blocks and catching the southern light, desperately mowing and cutting off the walls. Less often, the authors think about the fact that in the country, although rarely and for a short time, there is summer, and then you have to hide from the heat.
It is interesting to look at the projects: despite the obvious (generic) similarities, some authors managed not only to penetrate into the especially relevant and very good typology of Active house, but also to endow the project, to a greater or lesser extent, with the imprint of their personality.
Alexander Poroshkin made his house economical through the use of standard elements and justified the environmental friendliness of the project by offering straw as a heater. The traditional hut composition is responsible for the Russian identity in the project: two slopes and three symmetrical windows on the facade, and the location of the stove in the very middle of the house. True, this is not a completely Russian stove, but rather a fireplace with a long chimney on which all three floors are strung (including the attic). A staircase winds around the chimney.
Rinat Gilmutdinov called his project winter-summer and made it a “highlight” of shutters that can be closed in cold weather and opened in warm weather. The house is strictly oriented to the cardinal points, and on the cold north side it has no windows. It is also designed for straw insulation, and inside there is a "heat core" with a fireplace and pipes for hot water.
Yulia Potekhina made her house of two volumes: a metal "house" with a sharp roof is cut into a wooden volume, the gentle slopes of which should provide the rooms with better insolation. The windows are covered with openwork shutters on guides - so that they do not need to be opened, but can be rolled in Japanese "on a sled."
Tatyana Leshikhina and Anastasia Gritskova made their home - for warmth - a solid volume. The southern slope of the cube's roof is lowered strongly to capture more light - and inside there is a semblance of a three-level mini-atrium with a winter garden. The authors took care not only of heating the house, but also of cooling it in the summer: for this, paraffin panels were conceived on the south wall.
Anton Mosin made his version of the house a one-storey one, covered it with a sloping four-pitched roof with deep eaves and surrounded by a glass wall around the perimeter, creating an air gap for insulation in winter and keeping cool in summer. The basement of the house is minimal (15 centimeters) and from this it seems drowned in the grass and subtly resembles Wright's "prairie house".
Ekaterina Nagibina divided the two main functions of the house: private and public, into two volumes, placing them with their "backs" to each other. The living room fits into a dark brown two-story house, and the bedrooms - in a light one-story house with south-facing windows. The resulting plan of a house in the shape of a Tetris figurine is quite original and in places looks carefully thought out and convenient.
Igor Chirkin designed his "active home" in a simple and familiar way for a Russian person. A long wooden parallelepiped with a gable roof looks like … the author claims to be a hangar. I would say that to the barrack. Boldly, boldly. The topic of identity, at least, is fully disclosed here.
Shamsudin Kerimov presented his active house in the form of a gray volume with a cut-off slope of the southern roof, generously cut by windows, including a panoramic one - on the ground floor. Environmental friendliness is provided by a pine frame with insulation. Another thing is surprising: only this author made his project cheaper than stated in the conditions: 40 instead of the required 50 thousand rubles per square meter (the total cost of the house is thus reduced from the original 7.5-9 million to six or seven. that the other members didn't think about it). According to the author's calculations, his house will consume 3-4 times less energy than an average house of this size.
Tatiana Skordulya's house is filled with the romantic experience of a Russian hut, and at the same time it is brutally reinforced concrete. The concrete surface of the outer walls should, according to the author's plan, bear the imprints of wooden huts: logs, planks and even carved platbands. The meaning is great - the shadow of the disappeared old houses on the cold stone mass is like the imprint of a fossil, when life is gone, leaving behind the shadows of form. Strictly speaking, this is exactly what is happening with our private housing: "that", the old life, has practically disappeared, we are seeing the remnants. Perhaps that is why the silhouette of the house is deliberately rough and resembles a collective farm structure. The giant chimney turns out to be just as fake: the chimney is arranged on the edge, inside the utility room.
The rear (south) façade consists of automatic glass doors and dense sandwich panels; in summer it can be opened entirely, turning the living room into an open veranda; in winter, by closing it, insulate the house. According to the author's idea, the walls consist of typical layered panels: concrete - insulation - concrete.
Lyrical, effective and thoughtful project, perhaps one of the strongest. It is unclear, though, if passéism can become a gateway to the future. And one more detail - it seems that this project is the only one where a library is drawn in the interiors.
Ekaterina Osipova, the only participant from St. Petersburg, mentally divided her house into two parts, and interpreted only one of them as an “active home”. The long hull extending into the depths of the site is set on high "legs" and is equipped with the signs of an Active house. The other part is designed to separate it from the road; its windows face the courtyard, and there is a terrace on the roof that is invisible from the street. The house is planned to be made up of a timber frame with stone wool insulation and wood paneling.
Alexandra Yankevich and Anna Delgado from the AB11 architectural bureau suggested covering some of the walls with revolving boards. One side of the board is black and must be turned outward in winter to catch the crumbs of winter sun heat. The other side is light and can be turned outward in summer; in summer you can also leave the boards at an angle, forming a ventilation grill. The authors also tried to reduce the estimated construction cost; they got 47,500 per square meter, a total of about 400 thousand rubles in savings.
All nominee projects are definitely endowed with a significant amount of progressive positivity, which is, let's say, the "background" charge of these works, their required minimum. However, when there are more than three such projects, and especially more than ten, the question arises of how you can single out someone from the generally progressive mass. It seems to me that there are two answers: firstly, those who, in addition to imagery and technique, think about reducing prices, are noticeable - there are not many of them. On the other hand, projects that are endowed with something like a cultural superstructure are remarkable. Informally, but sincerely and sincerely approached the search for identity.
There is also a third criterion - the maximum accuracy and depth of disclosing the topic of the "active home" from a technical point of view. This criterion is available to expert engineers who thoroughly know the European concept of Active house. What will win in the assessment - a creatively understood "Russian spirit" or Protestant rationalism - is even interesting.
We remind you that you can help to build the audience's award for the prettiest project through online voting on facebook.
