“But what I cannot agree with is the shameless outright slander and discrediting of the Russian Russian architectural school. Such a tone is fundamentally unacceptable. As well as praise and admiration for Western specialists … In order to understand how wrong the approach of indiscriminate denigration of Russian architects is, it is necessary to accept the fact that almost everything that is built in Russia is 99% built according to the designs of Russian architects by Russian builders. But buildings built according to the designs of foreign architects in Russia can be searched for a very long time! In Perm, they simply did not exist, they are not, and they are not expected in the near future."
Igor Lugovoy, Chief Architect of Saturn-R LLC (Perm)
Igor Vasilievich Lugovoi, mentioned by me in the article "Idea or Technique?" brilliantly confirms its main thesis: the value system of Russian "real" designers is radically shifted towards "technology". Perhaps this client-oriented and expert-oriented design culture is meant by the "Russian architectural school": I, like, probably, each of us, heard this phrase, but I have never been able to get a clear definition from anyone - what is behind it?
I will once again explain my position. I am by no means against Russian architects, on the contrary. I can immediately name two dozen names and teams that really work at the level of the "major league" of world architecture, several people who have real potential to be world stars. But they, like, apparently, many of the architects unknown to me, are carriers of a design culture that is somewhat different from the “Russian school of architecture”. And I don't like the fact that in my great country there are very few buildings that you can be proud of and a lot of architecture that you are ashamed of. It seems to me that this situation needs to be changed. For the Russian school of architecture (without the quotes) to become a part of the world one, we must start learning ourselves. The world is changing, and architects must also change.
A very important question raised by Igor Vasilyevich is the attitude to the law. It is to the law, and not only to the numerous established and already canceled normative acts, many of whose provisions are redundant and only recommendatory, that the Designers strive to strictly comply with the joint venture and SNiP, since they are controlled by the state examination, but they do not care about the legal rights violated as a result of their projects third parties. Meanwhile, it is the use of legal mechanisms that today is the basis of urban planning regulation and the ability to use them is also part of what we should borrow from the world design culture. It must be understood, however, that the law is not an instruction, it does not prescribe what needs to be done, but only protects us from possible harm. And if the law does not contain the term “master plan”, this does not mean that it cannot be developed.
Finally, a couple of rebuttals.
I. V Lugovoi writes: “Since 2009, KCAP has been developing a project for quarter 179 (the territory of the Regional Psychiatric Hospital). But after 3 years, there is still no plan for this quarter. Last year there was a lot of talk about the project for planning the territory of the DKZh-Svetly microdistrict. They said that the project was almost ready. Not a planning project for 2 quarters that were sold at auction, but a project for the entire territory. There is still no such project either."
The project of the 179th quarter, which was developed by the Dutch KCAP and the Perm bureau "A +", was handed over to the customer, public hearings are scheduled for April 10. The planning project for the building complex, which was developed by the Dutch Schiemann Weyers Architects and the Perm Bureau of Urban Projects, is ready, will be handed over to the customer this month.
