Yuri Avvakumov:
Achievement of the Year - Russian Pavilion in Venice.
Disappointment of the year - a project of the NCCA on Baumanskaya.
Dmitry Alexandrov:
The main success of the year is the unanimous establishment by all regions of the National Chamber of Architects, a professional organization of a new type.
The main disappointment is the competitions, especially Skolkovo, D2 area.
Andrey Asadov:
The success of the year - perhaps the new chief architect of the city (Sergei Kuznetsov) and his new team, there is hope for positive shifts in Moscow urban planning in general and the role of the architect in this in particular. At least, if it is possible to at least partially realize his intentions to create a master plan for Moscow, "autonomous" urban clusters and neighborhood development, high-quality facades and modern appearance of new buildings, it will be great.
The disappointment of the year was a venture with New Moscow, which nevertheless provided an excellent occasion for a broad discussion of the potential of “old” Moscow and the real expansion of several highways in the southwest.
Nikita Asadov:
I can't say that I closely watched the events, but I feel like this year they took place not so much in the field of architecture, but rather somewhere nearby. So, for me, perhaps, these two events took place in the field of education - the creation of MARSH as positive, and the story of MARCHI as sad. And the second big disappointment is connected with the "Big Moscow", namely, with the fact that the project is being implemented contrary to all common sense. It is good that it became a pretext for a competition and professional discussion with rather curious results, but it is a pity that, it seems, again on paper.
Vladimir Bindeman:
To be honest, of the built, I was most impressed by foreign objects - for example, the Gehry skyscraper in New York and the Black Panther office in Graz, but, strictly speaking, these are buildings from 2010-2011. Yes, and I was also very impressed by the MIET Institute, built by Felix Novikov and Georgy Saevich in 1971. We went there with Felix Novikov in June of this year, when the architect came to Moscow: for its time, this is a super-innovative structure, it still amazes with the drama of space and the power of techniques.
And a lot is disappointing, it is even difficult to distinguish what exactly. For example, from the latter - we were with the IAC at the archpromenade in Rosstat (CSO) Le Corbusier. The bureaucratic reconstruction with the "renovation" of the interiors was very disappointing. They ditched Corby in the bud, the famous stained-glass windows with ventilation were replaced with double-glazed windows of gray color and a lot of other things were done. There are only ramps left from it - so they are impressive.
Nikita Biryukov:
I see the main success of the year in the fact that we are alive!
The main disappointment is the lost professional horizons.
Eduard Zabuga:
“Games of architecture” continue in Russia, and our architects are endlessly tied to oil and gas. Of course, everywhere in the world there are rules - bad or not so bad - but in few places an architect is equated with a “service of everyday life”. I do not presume to judge the successes and failures of the year, tk. I don’t understand the evaluation criterion … As an architect, I am amazed by the professional architectural achievements of Brazil and China - it is also not sweet there, but there is a subject for discussion … By the way, it would be very interesting to announce a competition for ideal views of modern Russian cities and streets. To understand, so to speak, what to fight for - for some reason I am sure that we will not find "Russia" in these romantic vedutes, no matter how sad it is. Potemkin villages are our ceiling.
Yaroslav Kovalchuk:
The success of the year is the opening of MARCH.
The disappointment of the year was the resignation of Oleg Chirkunov and the threat of a change in the entire urban planning policy in Perm.
Totan Kuzembaev:
Achievement of the year - MARCH opening.
The disappointment of the year is the construction of the Shigeru Bana pavilion in Gorky Park. I waited so long for when, finally, a real western star will implement his project in Moscow, and I especially waited for Shigeru Bana, because he is a master of temporary architecture made of light, environmentally friendly materials. And what do we see in Gorky Park? A capital structure in which there is more concrete than anything else, and cardboard is used purely as decoration. What kind of profanity? And why did it happen: did a western star come to us for a chees or are our SNIPs so awful? Somehow this moment did not become clear, but the sediment, as they say, remained …
Alexander Kuptsov:
The outgoing year has presented not only "the end of the world", but also a whole series of completely different architectural competitions, both held and not very successful. The beginning was laid by the announcement of the results for the residential areas of Skolkovo, but at the same time, about 30 promised tenders for other objects in Skolkovo were not held. The most productive, namely those completed with construction, or with implementation in the near future, are competitions for the ArchiWOOD pavilion (Peripter by Gikalo Kuptsov Architects), the School pavilion (architects Igor Chirkin, Alexei Podkidyshev) in Muzeon Park, book trade pavilions in Moscow parks (Rue Temple team), micro-houses in Muzeon park. In this case, Muzeon Park acts as an alternative to Gorky Park, where so far not a single object has been built by competition, and thanks to the park architecture, there will soon be no park left …
Of the “big contests”, the situation with “Zaryadye Park” is very indicative: the directive “lowered from above” served as the basis for a dummy competition, such a kind of training before the “Big Moscow”, when the city is initially enlarged, then a competition is held, and as a result the Institute of the General Plan Will "draw" his own version, exactly what happened to the concept of the development of the ZIL territory from the Megonom bureau.
In the Russian pavilion at the Venice Biennale there is a "Potemkin village" - the Skolkovo pantheon from the established "tandem" of Commissioner Grigory Revzin and architect Sergei Tchoban, captivating overseas guests with innovative glamor. At Zodchestvo - "New", at an exposition similar to the labyrinth of an oriental bazaar in search of "precious emeralds", one can only find carpenters "on their knees" chopping parametric exercises from a log.
Among other important events, I would also like to note the opening of the CSK Garage pavilion by the architect Shigeru Bana, the appointment of new chief architects in Moscow and Samara, the opening of MARSH.
Nikolay Lyzlov:
The main achievement of the year is the intensification of construction activity, the main disappointment is the soap bubble of Greater Moscow.
Ilya Mukosey:
An important event of the past year was the change of the chief architect of Moscow. It is, of course, too early to talk about the successes or failures of Sergei Kuznetsov in this post. But the mere fact that the main architect of the city became a person not from the "system" is already a great achievement. Another trend that has strongly strengthened this year is the general interest in urbanism. Now this word (and even some idea of what it means) has become known to the general public, now everyone is interested in the improvement of urban spaces. We love this trend as designing urban landscapes is one of our favorite things to do.
Vladimir Plotkin:
Perhaps the main achievement of the year, I think, is the Russian pavilion at the Venice Biennale of Architecture. Effective, noticeable, interesting! And the main disappointment was the refusal of Yaroslavl to implement our hotel project. Even a citywide referendum was held to document this refusal.
Sergey Skuratov:
The main disappointment of the year is the competition for the concept of development of the territories of Greater Moscow. And the results themselves disappointed me, and how they are now planned to be used. Was it worth holding such a large-scale competition with a large number of sessions and meetings if everything ended as usual? Another disappointment was the fact that now the chief architect of the city is the first deputy chairman of the Moscow Architecture Committee. This is an unconditional downgrade of status, which, I think, will affect the professional community as a whole. Skolkovo and the local tenders also disappointed - there is a feeling that everything is rapidly blowing away, and the state is beginning to abandon its obligations, turning the federal initiative into a private development project.
As an achievement, I would attribute the fact that the Moscow authorities are trying to form in the field of urbanism and architecture - perhaps officials are only creating such an appearance, but I want to hope for the best. However, it is too early to talk about the fruits of this self-education: the whole year the city was thrown from one extreme to another. Either the construction was frozen within the Third Transport Ring, then suddenly the idea arose to give out 2 million square meters within the Garden. Either dedicated lanes for public transport appeared everywhere, then it became clear that de facto they did not work like that. Isn't there a golden mean? How does Moscow intend to resolve the transport issue? How will you develop your industrial zones? What, for example, will happen to ZIL? In other words, this year has brought more questions than answers.
Nikita Tokarev:
The main success is the opening of MARSH. And not because I'm a director. Regardless of persons, MARSH is the first initiative in architecture education for I am afraid to say how many years, the first independent school, the first international architecture school in Moscow, which gives a "freely convertible" diploma, one of the largest master's degrees in architecture and urban planning in Russia. We have a decent competition - 2 people per seat. You ask: what about Strelka? It is interesting that although we are not competitors at all (Strelka has different tasks and different results), we often find ourselves in pairs. In the voting, the Village lost only a few votes, and that's just after six months of work! I consider this a success.
The success in architecture itself is the Muzeon Park, a beautiful terrace on the side of the river and a wooden road through the park, designed by Evgeny Ass. Our architecture is especially poor in landscape projects, now something is emerging. Last year the esplanade in Gorky's Pack, now - "Muzeon". I really hope that this project will be implemented to the end and that it will be a success next year as well.
Failures - alas, everything else. I will not talk about politics here: darkness and darkness. The gloomiest predictions for Moscow transport seem to be close to being realized. And there is no understanding in the mayor's office that the problem cannot be solved simply by building an expressway or a junction, another gift to the construction lobby. The fate of the competition for the concept of Moscow's development and the tone of the first talks about the new general plan are proof of this. Urban planning mistakes on this scale - they last for decades, if not longer.
Sergey Tumanin:
Among the main achievements of the year, I would consider the opening of the second competition "Archnovation" and the creation of independent non-state examinations, which should greatly speed up the design processes.
The main failure of the year, which worries me greatly, is that in Nizhny Novgorod RusHydro raised the Volga mark by 4 meters without asking anyone. This will lead to an environmental disaster over a large floodplain. And the authorities of the province are also silent, although earlier they actively opposed it.
Interviewed by Anna Martovitskaya
