Multifunctional complex on Leningradsky Prospekt
The first to present his project was Andrey Romanov, head of the ADM bureau. The building of the complex is located near the Sokol metro station, at the intersection of Leningradsky Prospekt with Volokolamskoye Highway. The project is the second stage of the complex (mostly office) - a building stretched along the highway is planned to be built on the site of the Soviet factory building, which will be demolished this fall. The ADM bureau is also working on the first stage: four buildings located in the depths of the site are almost ready. Architects, as Andrei Romanov told the council, pay special attention to the quality of landscaping: about 2 hectares between the buildings and around them will become a public space open to the city with a good pavement, lighting, benches and trees.
The building of the second stage, presented to the council, inherits the imagery of the buildings located in the depths of the territory, but reacts to the avenue, enlarging the scale and adding plastics. The floors are combined in pairs into high ribbons, and these ribbons are bent - in uneven waves, figuratively reacting to the traffic of cars. The architects offered the council as many as four options for facades, generally similar, but varying in surface density: somewhere more terracotta panels, somewhere glass (the council chose the fourth option, which is shown here in the pictures).
The two lower tiers are completely given over to shops and cafes, their facades slightly receding into the depths of the building are entirely glass, with smoothly rounded corners, closer to the center of the building are parting by two asymmetric curved passages leading to a green square in the depths of the territory. In addition, it is planned to build an underground three-level parking lot. The loading area is tucked into the ground. And the sidewalk along the avenue is being improved on the personal initiative of the customer and the architect.
Consideration of the project at the council was rather benevolent - all speeches began and ended with compliments to the authors, and Sergei Tchoban even spoke of ADM as a young and promising bureau, which are few in Moscow now. The members of the council were, however, very attentive to details and discussed at length. Reasonable questions were raised by the section of the park, which was immediately noticed by Sergey Kuznetsov, which was given to the ground parking. By mutual agreement of the architects and the council, it was decided to remove the parking lot, giving the entire territory to the park.
Further discussion revolved around the layout of the aisle in the lower tier of the building. The fact is that a kind of spatial cross is formed between the symmetrically spaced four buildings of the first stage: two short wide boulevards intersect in the center of the territory. Some of the council members considered the resulting axis to be an important spatial element, requiring a "classic" exit to the avenue in the form of one large opening, and not two beveled aisles. Hans Stimmann said that he had visited the construction site the day before and was pleased to note for himself the high quality of the architecture of the first stage, but he recommended keeping the axis that would connect the already built complex with the new one. Alexei Vorontsov, on the contrary, found it unnecessary to bring the axis of the alley to Leningradsky Prospekt, in his words, "two aisles create a much greater intrigue." Sergei Tchoban also supported the idea with two passes, but suggested making them symmetrical, two rays diverging from the inner axis.
In general, all members of the council unanimously began their speeches with compliments, emphasizing that today in Moscow such high-quality, reasoned and mature architecture is extremely rare. It was decided to agree on the project with minimal modifications.
Exhibition complex project in Bolshoy Chudov lane
The project is part of the tourist route, on which Yuri Platonov has been working for quite some time (it forms a kind of chain of projects, which includes, in particular, the reconstruction of the Provision Warehouses and many other sections between the Kievsky railway station and Zubovskaya square). In this case, the site is located between the exit from the Park Kultury station of the circular line and the Church of St. Nicholas in Khamovniki, a beautiful and well-preserved church of the 17th century. However, the site is now fenced off from the church by the Acropolis shopping center, built in the 1990s in a scale and style typical of that time.
Yuri Platonov's project changed its function several times: now it is an exhibition complex (it used to be a trade complex). The glass building with an arc-shaped passage inside is surrounded by a thin portico in the spirit of the classic trends of the 1970s. It is planned to open summer expositions and cafes on open terraces.
It is proposed to locate an underground parking on the Zubovskaya overpass section. Pedestrian flows from the metro will go along Komsomolsky Prospekt, as well as behind the projected building. In this regard, walk-throughs through the lobby are planned. There is also a diagonal passageway oriented towards the temple. Public spaces have been created on the ground floor - a lobby and a cafe. The rest of the floors are occupied by exhibition halls - single, double and mezzanine.
The council members did not consider the architecture of the project (although in general it felt that it was appreciated rather favorably) - because the main subject of discussion was the legal problem of the site. According to Alexander Kibovsky, almost half of the land plot under construction is located in the security zone established by the Moscow government back in 1997. And according to the current legislation, any new construction in the security zone is prohibited. According to Kibovskiy, this project will not pass the examination: “The monstrous Acropolis shopping center, previously built in the security zone, does not justify its further development. Either you need to adjust its boundaries, or fit the project on a site outside of it. All further discussion revolved around this thought.
Alexey Kurennoy confirmed that this project was approved by the Moscow Committee for Architecture more than five years ago: “The project was received by the State Property Management Department, then it was considered by the town planning and land commission. On the basis of the GPZU, the team of Yuri Platonov developed a concept in compliance with the specified volumes. To this, Alexander Kibovsky noted that everyone remembers how the five-year-old projects were coordinated and how they treated the protected zones at that time. In addition, according to Kibovsky, the GPZU forms the maximum permissible parameters, and this does not mean that the entire site needs to be built up entirely.
“First of all, we need to decide on the volume parameters,” Alexey Vorontsov joined the discussion. - It is necessary to follow the current legislation, which means that it is necessary to reduce the volume. This is much easier to do than to change the boundaries of the security zone. But the most important thing is that the town planning documents need to be corrected so that the authors of the project do not find themselves in such an unpleasant situation."
But for Andrey Bokov, the situation seemed not so hopeless. He suggested that the authors use the recreation resource within the buffer zone, as well as underground spaces.
Rustam Rakhmatullin summed up the discussion with a speech from the audience. According to Rakhmatullin, there are opportunities for design on this site, but only in the regeneration mode (that is, the construction of buildings in the volumes of previously lost buildings, approx.ed.), and emphasized that it would be wrong if the architectural council spoke in favor of changing the boundaries of the security zone.
The project was rejected. The authors were recommended to change the project, going beyond the line of the security zone, or to propose a justification for changing its boundaries.
Pre-design proposal for the adaptation of the territory of the Ostankino estate
The famous Ostankino estate, the suburban residence of the Sheremetev counts with a luxurious wooden palace and theater, is well known to everyone who knows Moscow in any way. Since last year, the palace has been closed for restoration. The Arch Council was shown a complete project of the future restoration, within the framework of which it is planned to build (or rather, dig) a fairly large volume of new museum premises on the territory of the former economic yard of the estate.
One of the authors of the project Stanislav Poshvykin, showing him to the council, said that the estate was always two-part and was divided into the territory of the "holiday", balls and ceremonial halls - and the economic part, where the greenhouse complex, the horse yard and the outbuildings were located. In addition to the restoration of the surviving buildings of the estate, the project involves the restoration of all greenhouses, outbuildings, an equestrian yard in their previous forms and the installation of an extensive underground part under them on the territory of the farm yard, where the museum storage, restoration workshops, a lecture hall, a theater and several exhibition halls and a parking lot will fit.
The only new implementation, according to the authors, will be to lower the level of the equestrian yard by more than four meters. Down you can go down the long ramp. Over the entire existence of the museum, about 30 thousand exhibits have accumulated in it, which today are stored in the wing and in the palace itself, occupying almost half of the museum space. Therefore, before undertaking the restoration of the estate complex, it is necessary to free it by building a storage facility. Especially for these needs, the Moscow government allocated a plot of more than 5 hectares to the museum next to the park. It is proposed to make the main entrance to the museum from the side of the temple (and not from the side of the palace, as now) and provide gas for the year-round operation of the museum (earlier Ostankino was closed in winter).
The head of the Moscow Heritage Committee, Alexander Kibovsky, acting in the role of a technical customer in this project, eagerly spoke about the stages of its implementation. It is supposed to start with outbuildings and storage facilities, and only presumably by 2018 it will be possible to begin the restoration of the palace. The restoration will take place at the expense of budget funds, the planned budget is about 9 billion rubles, which are planned to be allocated gradually. Kibovsky expressed the hope that this work will become exemplary (and unique in terms of the scale of restoration of the estate) among all restoration work not only in Russia, but also in the world.
The discussion of the project centered around the issues of delicacy and authenticity of the reconstruction. According to Sergei Tchoban, if we are talking about restoration, then it is necessary to build only from authentic, that is, analogous to historical materials; and modern ramps, lowering the ground level, etc., are inappropriate. “In this case, it is necessary to build the way it was built in the 18th century, there should not be a single visible modern detail,” Sergei Tchoban is sure. Andrei Gnezdilov, on the other hand, thought the modern solution of the entrance part was witty and delicate. Hans Stimmann drew the attention of the audience to the fact that we are talking about a new territory attached to the park, on which new buildings appear quite naturally. Making a ramp inside the horse yard, according to Stimmann, is not entirely justified, but leaving some sign of modern architecture on the border with the street, reminding that the restoration took place in the 21st century, makes sense.
The project was actively supported by museum staff, recalling that we are talking about preserving a monument that is genuine to every door handle and floorboard, the likes of which are practically nonexistent in Russia and in the world.
Towards the end, a tense discussion unfolded between Rustam Rakhmatullin and Alexander Kibovsky. Rakhmatullin was interested in the order of consideration: why the project is shown in the first place at the arch council and what legal force the protocol of the arch council has in this case. Kibovsky's answer was: we want to show the project to colleagues and get their opinion. "This project will sooner or later get approval for the department, the head of which I am," said Alexander Kibovsky, "And I would like to know all the opinions of competent people before launching such a serious and costly project."
