On Monday, it is planned to announce the winners of two sensational landscape and architectural competitions dedicated to the improvement of iconic places in Moscow: Triumfalnaya Square and Khodynskoe Pole. In anticipation of the long-awaited information, we are publishing all the works of the participants in the competition for the concept of the Khodynskoye Pole park.
The results of the ranking, compiled by the jury of the competition, became known on April 1. The first three places in the rating went to LAND Milano Srl., Perkins eastman and Landscape architecture studios by Maxim Kotsyub respectively. Further, the places were distributed as follows:
4. OKRA landscape architects (Netherlands, Utrecht)
5. Arteza (Russia, Moscow)
6. Homeland Architecture (Russia, Moscow)
7. Lap Landscape & Urban Design (Netherlands, Rotterdam)
8. Creative Workshop T. M. (Russia, Samara)
9. ARGE M2M8 / Glasser & Dagenbach (Germany-Russia)
10. Anatoly Kozlov, Denis Barsukov (Russia, Moscow)
So, we present all ten concepts of the Khodynskoye Pole park.
Ranking leaders
1st place / Land Milano SRL (Italy, Milan)
Italian architects, whose team included Mario Cucinella Architects, LeftLoft graphic designers and artist Thomas Schönauer, built their concept on a "combination of art and natural forms", saturating the park with installations and objects, including an open amphitheater, a musical tower, a musical boulevard, lots of happenings and other outdoor activities. The objects placed in the park are beautiful and modern: “mushrooms” protecting from rain, a glowing meadow, a musical fountain, metro entrances in the form of glass pavilions with sloping walls, which the authors compare to ice fragments.
The traffic patterns have been carefully worked out, from public transport stops and roads around the park to walking, cycling, skiing, horseback riding routes and gps tours. The density of the network of paths, the authors emphasize, takes into account the likely number of visitors to the park.
2nd place / Perkins Eastman (USA, New York)
American authors call their version of the park "a natural refuge in an urban environment." They divided the park into three zones: along the buildings of the NCCA and the shopping center (on the site of the former runway) there is an "esplanade" - a free passage for many visitors. On the contrary, along the arc of Khodynsky Boulevard in front of residential buildings, there is a "garden" for local residents to walk. Inside, separated from the esplanade by a lake, there is a “forest”, a relatively wild and romantic place.
The variety of the walking theme is supported by the "chronological disc" developed by the authors of the park design objects focused on the history of Russian culture and art.
3rd place / Landscape Architecture Studio of Maxim Kotsyuba (Ukraine, Kiev)
If the Americans placed a forest in the center of the park, then Maxim Kotsyuba, on the contrary - a large area of a strictly oval shape. The square is intended for theatrical performances and other events, for example, in the winter there could be a snow town or an exhibition of ice sculptures. A thorough analysis of the urban planning situation and the expected traffic intensity, taking into account the surrounding street network, allowed the authors to form a complex system of spaces for various activities: family recreation, youth sports, and hiking.
A symbolic part of the project was the cable-stayed bridge proposed by the architects, a reflection on the theme of the propeller, "reminiscent of the aviation past of the Khodynsky Field."
Other finalist teams
4 / Okra Landscape Architects (Netherlands, Utrecht)
Here, the place of the square in front of the NCCA building is occupied by an extensive water parterre - a pond crossed by three bridges and continued by a canal that divides a piece of the park into two parts. However, the architects tied the space with an elastic grid of wide, albeit rather rare, paths, and crossed out the colorful lawns with a wide arc.
5 / Arteza (Russia, Moscow)
The architects of the Artez landscape design workshop focused on geoplastics - the creation of artificial relief, which allowed the authors to increase the area of landscaping and form many different landscape options within the park. Walking through the park, the authors emphasize, "a visitor could get from one landscape to another: from a lilac garden to an apple orchard, to a coniferous forest, to open spaces covered with massifs of cereals."
Dmitry Onishchenko, CEO of Arteza:
“For us, participating in such a project, competing on equal terms with such companies as Perkins Eastman from the USA or the Dutch LAP landscape & Urban Design is an invaluable experience. Initially, we did not set ourselves an obligatory goal to win this competition. Together with our partners, the architectural studio MEL and the lighting company IPro, we created a high-quality concept, were able to solve complex planning problems, proposed bold ideas for planning and geoplastic space, introduced modern architectural solutions and innovative lighting systems. Our team has done a great job, which we are very pleased with. I am sure that this experience will increase our chances in future competitions, and in Russia there will finally appear parks designed by Russian specialists for Russian conditions."
6 / Homeland Architecture (Russia, Moscow)
The architects abandoned the idea of fan waves of artificial relief, which was present in the first draft version, and divided the park into two parts: the “city” one, more like a square, between the exits from the metro and the museum, and the landscape one, with curved paths and equally winding ponds. English park and a variety of vegetation.
7 / Lap Landscape & Urban Design (Netherlands, Rotterdam)
The Dutch authors focused on sports, placing an oval of a football field under the windows of the NCCA, and another field at a distance, closer to residential buildings. A wide road winds along the perimeter, suggesting a good run along the arched pond, probably to keep the air humid enough throughout the exercise. However, here, too, there were basic ideas: an English park, which occupied the main part, and French regular parterres, stretched out in an arc along the array of residential buildings on Khodynsky Boulevard.
8 / Creative workshop of T. M. (Russia, Samara) Samara architects, also passionate about sports, albeit to a lesser extent than the Dutch, turned their park into an abstract picture composed of several geometric grids and textures - in the spirit of Malevich, somewhat more regular than usual. However, the translucent tracts of trees, drawn with long straight lines, create one of the clearest images of the airfield. This is probably the most contextual and nostalgic project of all, despite the lack of unambiguous attributes of an airfield like propellers and airplanes.
9 / Arge M2M8 / Glasser & Dagenbach (Germany-Russia) The project, however, like the previous one, continues the ideas laid down in the sketch of the first round of the competition. Here everything is logical and simple: the flat parterre is grouped at the NCCA, however, instead of the bizarre lines of French classicism, here, like among the Samarans, there are slanting strokes of the avant-garde. In the main part there are multi-colored flower beds (some of them are promised inclined), along a wide arc stretches a landscape park, which, closer to the border, is trying to turn into a parterre again, but now "correct" French, with semicircles and frames, but half-overgrown, but quite serious. The scheme resembles the Lap project, or vice versa (who knows).
10 / Anatoly Kozlov, Denis Barsukov (Russia, Moscow) Bright presentation significantly interferes with perception, making the park look like a dance floor. Meanwhile, there is much of what has already been listed in the previous concepts (which, of course, does not mean borrowing): stadiums (for some reason, next to the church), the imposition of curved paths on straight "arrows", a flexible ribbon of a pond with bridges, boats, etc. the beach; aircraft propellers, crossbows, a small amphitheater and a water parterre in front of the museum.
Anatoly Kozlov, architect:
“The urban planning structure of the park in our project is determined by a system of ray paths in tall greenery, directed towards the main dominant - the NCCA building. Our project is distinguished by a clear functional division of the territory into zones, each of which differs in the nature of spatial impressions. In the upper zone of park services, in accordance with the assignment, there are two wings of three-storey passages (with a total area of about 40,000 m2) - the road to the temple. Above is the transit route of masses of fans from the west (CSKA stadium under construction) and east (Megasport ice arena) towards the northern exit of the metro. The tape of the system of reservoirs, with its ends aimed at the breaks of the building from the north, plays the role of horizontal links. The shape of the park with zones-sectors gives rise to the image of a dish with dishes to choose from”.
*** Reporting the results of the judging, the chief architect of Moscow, Sergei Kuznetsov, specially emphasized that the winner does not necessarily become one of the top three - in theory, all participants have the same chances of success. The winner, as already mentioned, will be announced on Monday, April 7th. After the Department of Culture and the Department of Environmental Management give comments on the projects based on the jury's rating.
As a reminder, ten finalists were selected according to a mixed scheme: five for sketches and five for portfolios (sketches and portfolios can be seen here). In January 2014, two teams selected by portfolio - West 8 and HOK - were replaced by two others: Land Milano SRL and Lap Landscape & Urban Design.
