The Moscow government award for the best project in the field of preserving cultural heritage sites "Moscow Restoration" is being awarded for the fifth year in a row since 2011, and this year the ceremony was held especially solemnly: with a red carpet, jazz and top officials. The prizes were presented personally by Mayor Sergei Sobyanin: 42 restorers, specialists, heads of companies and organizations - for the 15 best, according to the jury, objects. All shortlisted works were noted and 15 special prizes were awarded.
According to Sergei Sobyanin, more than 600 objects have been restored since the award was established, and the restoration of 100 of them was completed this year. 69 applications for 40 projects were submitted for the competition. “In 2011, we set ourselves a simple goal - to show that there is an industry, there are restorers and there are monuments that are being restored,” said the head of the Moscow City Heritage Site Alexei Yemelyanov. - It was important for us to support the Moscow school of restorers. Today, the holding of such a competition is an undoubted incentive for specialists in the restoration industry. And the level and quality of the restoration work carried out this year is very high. *** The awards were presented in six nominations.
Per "Objects of civil architecture" awarded the specialists who worked on the chambers in Arkhangelsky Lane, the Catherine Hospital at the Petrovsky Gates and the objects of Gorky Park.
Chambers of the 17th century in Arkhangelsky lane
The building of the building of 2 chambers of the 17th century in Arkhangelsky lane was repeatedly rebuilt, overgrown with outbuildings; owners and functions changed. The front lobby appeared at the beginning of the 20th century. The main façade of the chambers faces Krivokolenny Lane with an indent into the depths of the garden, the butt - into Arkhangelsky Lane. The restoration of a complex, multi-layered building was carried out in a short time by the "RSK" Architectural Heritage team.
Central Park of Culture and Leisure named after Gorky: main propylaea and a toilet with columns
The park's management presented to the jury the restoration of the main entrance - the "Triumphal Gate" with a forged metal fence, which appeared in 1955 on the Crimean shaft (architects Yu. Shchuko and A. Spasov, engineers L. Shoikhet and B. Novikov). The restorers faced a lot of difficulties associated with experimental building materials and post-war technologies, but having coped with them, they enriched the park with a new observation deck, which opened on the roof of the propyls.
Public toilet: a pompous building in the 1930s with short but imposing columns, which does not give out its purpose in any way, designed by A. V. Vlasov. He pleased the jury a lot with the correspondence of function and appearance, but nevertheless received recognition.
The specialists of PF-Restoration worked with two objects.
Catherine's Hospital (Gagarin's House) at the Petrovsky Gates
One of the most controversial or, as experts call it, "long-suffering" objects of the competition is Gagarin's house, which was later turned into a hospital. The main building is a palace with columns on the boulevard, built in 1774-1776 by the design of Matvey Fedorovich Kazakov, then the chief architect of Moscow. After a fire in 1812, the palace was almost completely destroyed, it was restored by another great Moscow architect - Osip Ivanovich (Giuseppe) Bove, after which the former palace was adapted for a hospital, which did not lose its function during the Soviet era.
The first restoration project appeared in the late 1990s, but was never implemented. In 2009, the building became the property of the city, and on the night of January 1, 2013, the city authorities were
the courtyard buildings of the estate by Bove, which were part of the palace complex, were demolished. A new administrative building of the Moscow City Duma was erected on the site vacated in this way, next to the restored architectural monument.
Despite such a sonority of the project, the complex restoration of the Catherine Hospital, which lasted more than two years, is positively assessed by the majority of experts. According to the Moscow City Heritage, in the course of the work, the facades of the main building were restored, the original decor, white-stone window sills, cornices and a basement were restored. The stucco portico of the facade was also restored and the coat of arms of the Russian Empire was recreated. The restoration work touched upon the interiors, the park and the temple located on the territory of the former hospital. Now the building is under the jurisdiction of the Moscow City Duma.
Ekaterininskaya Hospital received not one, but two awards - the second in the nomination "Objects of archaeological heritage" … In the course of archaeological work on the territory of the former palace complex, a collection of interesting objects of the 16th-17th centuries was collected. Among the finds, there are many jewelry items - for example, pomegranate stones with a total weight of 2.5 kg. *** What the experts say Grigory Mudrov, restorer, chief architect of the "Firma MARSS" organization, Member of the Competition Commission for the Moscow Restoration 2015 Prize:
Small and inconspicuous buildings
in the practice of an architect does not happen " I personally participated in the final selection of laureates, and I do not know of such significant, completed to date objects that would not be included in this list. The competition committee tried not to nominate objects of the "second and third entry" for the prize - when all the discoveries had already been made. The intellect, contribution and conventionally novelty of the project were assessed. There are textbook things that have long been read, and there are those that still had to be read - so they were valuable. Here we must understand that we do not have such a rich choice. But whatever is taken away is worthy of a reward. Remember architectural competitions - for example, the "Golden Section": before 2008 there were a huge number of applicants for the main prize, and after the 2008 crisis in the "Implementation" nomination, the shortlist consisted of two or three objects. In some nominations, we deliberately went to reduce the number of awarded objects in order to mark the really best. Of course, all projects of different levels - somewhere simpler, closer to a simple repair, somewhere more difficult, with serious scientific restoration, which also requires removing the sins of ten to fifteen years ago.
I would conventionally divide the objects of restoration into three groups. The first is openly investment projects, where the investor acts primarily in his own interests, trying to solve commercial problems, receive dividends from the territory, etc. The second group includes projects in which the investor honestly goes to the restoration and makes a worthy object. As an example, I can cite the Koptev house - Meyendorf, in the restoration of which I personally participated. There, the investor did not gain anything for himself, but made a high-quality and expensive restoration. The manor house was restored for an infinitely long time, starting from the second half of the 1990s.
I refer to the third group objects of the city order. The city takes on the most difficult cases when there is no money, there has not been and will not be. I cannot say that the city is an ideal customer. And, of course, this affects the results. The restoration cannot be regarded as a new construction, it is impossible to say in advance where the beginning and where the end of the work is. In the restoration, design, object understanding and implementation go hand in hand. But our budget legislation does not want to understand this in any way. In a planned economy, which, in fact, is a city, such an approach is unacceptable. As a result, the money is allocated at the wrong time, and you need to master it too quickly, and the result must be foreseen almost before any work is started.
At the same time, it can not but rejoice that the money from the city budget for restoration is allocated and very large - every year more and more. I thought that with the onset of difficult times of crisis, the budget would be severely cut, but nothing of the kind is happening yet. It is far from always possible to agree with the list and addresses of the objects of restoration, but what is really being restored deserves respect.
I am extremely happy that the project for the restoration of individual objects in Gorky Park received the award. I'm not talking about entry cuts, because this is a rather dry and technologically very difficult job, carrying a lot of experiments - we all imagine what the 1950s was. The Propylaea did not benefit from these experiments. I'm talking about a public toilet, the nomination of which seems, at first glance, strange. The competition committee also singled out this object for a long time through laughter. But he's wildly interesting. It was designed by outstanding architects and did it really well. This is an extremely unusual building, and the fact that it has been preserved speaks volumes. He says that there are no small and inconspicuous buildings in the practice of an architect, even a toilet can sometimes become a masterpiece.
Also, I would note the insane work of restorers over the Catherine Hospital. This is a long-suffering house that has undergone colossal changes due to the loss of its original function. After the establishment of a hospital in this building with completely different requirements for operation and new tasks, a lot was destroyed, carried away by a mighty hurricane. Everything that was done by the restorers was collected bit by bit - very carefully and carefully. But they could have done with the usual repairs. As a result, it turned out to find the optimal combination of compliance with restoration interests, solving the problems of preserving the monument with the need for its modern use.
I cannot but mention the very controversial restoration of the Cathedral Chamber. This building had a monstrous preservation - almost everything was destroyed, there were superstructures, new floors, a film studio. The urban planning situation has changed, the former surrounding buildings have almost completely disappeared. This is a very complex object, in which much could not be restored by definition. The restorers did an incredible job that could not be overlooked. Of course, any process will always have critics. There is no criticism only when nothing is done. " *** The most numerous was the nomination "City estates" … Seven projects were awarded here at once.
Koptev's estate - Meyendorf on Bolshaya Nikitskaya
The main house of the A. K. Kopteva - N. A. Meyendorff was built in 1809, but after only three years it completely burned down in a fire in 1812. Five years later, it was restored by the new owners. Later, the symmetrical two-story building underwent several major reconstructions. In 1900, the estate was reconstructed according to the project of the architect Alexei Flodin and since then has practically not changed its appearance, until the end of the 20th century. The last restoration, which was led by the architect and restorer Grigory Mudrov, was a private initiative of the investor. And thanks to the close-knit work of the specialists of the "Firma MARSS" company, the house managed to return its original historical features.
Vandyshnikova's estate - Banza on Vorontsov field
At the heart of the main house of the estate of E. P. Vandyshnikova - E. M. Banza - stone chambers of the 18th century, one of the oldest buildings in this place. The final appearance of the estate was formed by the end of the 19th century. In 1891-1898, the architect V. A. Kossov, the final touches were made a year later by S. F. Resurrection. Today the manor complex consists of several one- and two-storey volumes, including wooden ones. The main restorer of the object, the general director of the ArKo design bureau Yevgeny Kokorev previously noted that this is a very complex object, and "a combination of stone and wood, as well as the consequences of improper repairs in a year or two, could lead to its complete loss." According to Aleksey Yemelyanov, at the time of the restoration, the façade was 80% worn out, however, thanks to the high-quality and timely work carried out, it was possible to preserve the composition and architectural and artistic design, to leave the 19th century log house intact, and to restore the almost completely lost stucco molding.
Manor of the 18th – 19th centuries on Vorontsov field
The architectural ensemble, including the main house on Vorontsov Pole, a one-story southern wing with a modest decor, and a two-story northern wing overlooking Podsosensky Lane, was restored in 2015. I must say that this ensemble, which is part of the aforementioned Vandyshnikova-Banza estate, is one of the few that has survived to this day in an almost unchanged form.
House of pilot Rossinsky in Maly Vlasyevsky lane
The mansion was built at the end of the 19th century for one of the first Russian aviators, Boris Rossinsky, famous for being the first to fly over Moscow from Khodynskoye Pole to Lefortovo in an airplane without a cabin. A low-rise wooden-stone building of variable number of storeys was built in 1855-1869, and was completed according to the project of A. A. Felkoner in 1911. The main facade is an example of Moscow Art Nouveau. During the renovation work, the volumetric-spatial composition and planning structure were preserved, the ceremonial premises were recreated, in particular, the lobby with a coffered ceiling and stucco decoration. The renovated mansion will house the ROSIZO office.
Shibaev's estate on Novaya Basmannaya
The main house of the estate of S. M. Shibaeva at the corner of 1st Basmanny Lane belongs to the earliest construction period, completed in 1772. The main part of the estate's buildings is from the first half of the 19th century. Initially, the mansion was three-story with a rusticated ground floor and a pilaster portico. Then elements of the pseudo-Russian style were added, decor from multi-colored unglazed ceramics, cast-iron lattices. For this, pseudo-Russian period, the building was restored in 2015.
Mansion Korobkova on Pyatnitskaya
Restoration of the mansion by O. P. Korobkova, built by Lev Kekushev on Pyatnitskaya Street in 1894, when eclecticism allowed itself to be magnificent, and Art Nouveau was just being planned, ended last autumn. The building was returned to its original color, revealed during the studies of the 1905 extension. Brickwork and facades have been restored, foundations and roofs have been repaired.
House-Museum of Stanislavsky in Leontievsky Lane
The house in which from 1921 to 1938. lived Konstantin Stanislavsky, after restoration it was reopened and works as his house-museum. The mansion was built at the beginning of the 19th century on the foundations of the white-stone chambers of the turn of the 17th-18th centuries. During the restoration work, all three floors of the building, interiors and the main staircase were put in order. Items found during the dismantling of the walls and floors of the house: tiles, forged nails, clay pots - were included in the museum's exposition.
House of the Meshchersky in Leontievsky lane
In the 1760s, the house was built for Prince Grigory Meshchersky, then rebuilt in 1823, and in the 1880s according to the design of Alexander Kaminsky. In the courtyard there is a Doric colonnade. In the course of the restoration, the facade relief was restored, the window niches of the second floor were recreated, the drawing of the glass windows was refined. The restored house of the Meshchersky estate now serves as the Greek embassy.
*** What experts say Boris Pasternak
architect, member of the Historical and Cultural Expert Council, member of the Federal Scientific and Methodological Council for Cultural Heritage of the Ministry of Culture of Russia:
"It is necessary to develop long-term programs for the participation of the state in the conservation of decaying monuments"
“Prizes such as Moscow Restoration are undoubtedly indispensable for the restoration community. In the post-Soviet period, restoration was going through hard times. Now restorers are forced to fight to restore the prestige of the profession, its significance, while simultaneously realizing their place in the creative process in a new way, restoring the slightly shabby reputation of the Soviet restoration, and at the same time trying to follow the latest world restoration trends. Such prizes are addressed not only to restorers, but also to city authorities, for whom the significance of the restoration is not always obvious. At first, their attention is usually focused on the Kremlin or religious buildings. The value of other, "ordinary" monuments is gradually being realized. Cultural heritage sites are not always first-class buildings in marble and gilding. They often look much more modest and their value needs to be identified. The propaganda of the heritage, education of the culture of its perception and awareness of the significance of the restoration process, including by those “who make decisions”, are extremely important.
Inside our restoration workshop, any mistakes and shortcomings are visible to every professional, and the assessment of solutions is carried out according to the Hamburg score. A good restoration must be taken for granted. And any deviations are unacceptable. At the same time, in real working conditions, restorers are often under pressure from developers who, to put it mildly, question the value of cultural heritage. Therefore, it is very important that the city administration is actively involved in the process of promoting the heritage. For cultural heritage, this becomes a kind of additional protective letter, a kind of deterrent for the construction industry in its attempts to infringe on the rights of monuments, especially those of them whose value is not always shown - for example, industrial complexes or monuments of constructivism and modernism.
People who are far from the specifics of restoration may wonder whether it is worth organizing such solemn ceremonies in times of crisis. Of course, I don’t want to be remembered later as a feast during the plague. Today, there is a real fear that restoration budgets will collapse, private investment may come to naught. In such conditions, it is necessary to adjust the long-term programs of state participation in restoration. Moreover, the funds of the city, as it seems to me, should be directed, first of all, to the conservation and preservation of those cultural objects that are in danger. Boasting gilding and luxurious interiors against the backdrop of monuments that may not survive until next year is a little strange. This problem should be addressed through more active intervention by the city. Our heritage cannot be trusted to careless owners who evade their obligations to preserve monuments. Not a single civilized state in the world allows its common heritage to be reduced to destruction.
In addition, it is necessary to realize that Moscow, regardless of its successes or seeming shortcomings in the protection of monuments, is a model for other cities of our country, thanks to the "power" of its state protection structure. Against the background of regional centers, where sometimes 5-6 people are involved in this issue, and professionals are replaced by pseudo-lawyers, the organization of the protection of monuments in Moscow, of course, looks advantageous. The same can be said not only about the structure, but also about the quality of the implementations. In provincial cities, you can often see plastic windows in 17th century cathedrals, gilding from candy wrappers on the heads of churches and monastery towers covered with corrugated decking. And here the Moscow toolkit again stands out favorably. This applies, among other things, to grandiose federal restoration projects that were the subject of active self-promotion, such as the New Jerusalem Monastery, where doghouses with Cherubim carved from galvanized steel appeared on the site of the tent elements lovingly recreated after the war destruction.
At the same time, Moscow has its own problems. Large-scale restoration projects are carried out mainly at public expense. And the investment is calculated for a long time. This methodological problem also exists in developed countries. If the state invests money in the restoration of cultural heritage, then it counts on the long-term nature of its investments and is not going to paint and grease the monument again every 3-5 years. Everything must be done "forever". This leads to the fact that the details that could have been preserved serve only as models for recreation, the original fragments are sent, at best, to the museum, the authentic surfaces are replaced with renewed ones made of different, modern materials. A traditional example of this kind is the New Bridge in Paris, purified from the patina, or some French abbeys, where the real capitals were moved to the museum, and copies appeared in their place.
I would not talk in detail about all the projects that were awarded during the award - I saw some of them only from the outside. I will just say that the personal character of this award seems to me extremely important. This is the highest mark for the work of specific restorers. I am very pleased with the presence of such specialists as Elena Nikolaeva, Antonida Gustova, Grigory Mudrov, Evgeny Kokorev, Olga Yakovleva, etc. on the list of laureates. It is important to support these unique specialists, whose work very often remains in the shadows. Restorers are humble people, focused on their work. It is necessary to talk about their activities so that the next generation can learn from them, adopt their experience and generalize the accumulated knowledge."
*** Nomination "Objects of industrial architecture" this year it was founded for the first time, and there was only one project among the nominees for the main prize.
Warehouses of the Partnership of a vodka factory, warehouses of wine, alcohol and Russian and foreign grape wines P. A. Smirnov in Moscow
The warehouses on Sadovnicheskaya Street were built in 1888 by the architect N. A. Voskresensky. In the early 1940s, a three-story brick building became the main administrative and production building for champagne. In 2012, the site of the former plant was designated for redevelopment. Some of the buildings were demolished, and the restored building was included in the
residential quarter Wine House, built according to the project of the architectural bureau SPEECH and TPO "Reserve". The restorers repaired and strengthened the walls, restored brickwork and window openings.
*** What the experts say
Evgeny Kokorev
General Director of the ArKo design bureau:
"Many of the works shown had already turned into ruins by the time the restoration began."
“This year, Moscow Restoration has celebrated a lot of truly interesting restoration projects, in which the competition is only growing every year. As for the organization of the awards ceremony, it seems to me that the audience did not understand at all why the winners were given awards. The audience was not provided with any information about the history of the monuments. Even if an image of the restored buildings was shown on the screen, it was impossible to understand what exactly the restorers managed to do, to evaluate their work. But many of the works shown had already turned into ruins by the time the restoration began.
Among the projects awarded, one cannot fail to note the restoration of a large complex of the Catherine Hospital, which required enormous efforts from the restorers. The fact that it was possible to preserve the appearance of the hospital in almost its original form, given the complex engineering solutions, is undoubtedly the merit of the authors. I also really like brick architecture. Therefore, I would like to say separately about the warehouses of the Association of the Vodka Factory and the extremely laborious project of restoring the Cathedral Chamber. The quality of the facades' finishing makes these buildings central objects against the background of the surrounding buildings. In both cases, each individual brick had to be restored. I was also pleased with the professionalism of the restorers of the gravestones of the Novodevichy Cemetery. Stone and marble slabs are constantly exposed to the aggressive urban environment, and therefore require special attention.
And, of course, I cannot but mention the propylaea of Gorky Park, for which I had to look for new technological approaches to the restoration of later architectural monuments. It must be understood that these are completely different materials, decoration, constructive and architectural techniques, which differ significantly from what they did in the 19th and early 20th centuries. It's nice that in addition to the renovation, the authors managed to saturate the central gate with additional functions, having arranged a new observation deck at the top. " *** Nomination "Objects of cult architecture"
Cathedral Chamber in Likhov Lane
The building of the Cathedral Chamber, which at the beginning of the 20th century was a center of cultural and spiritual education, was built in 1901 according to the project of P. A. Vinogradov. The icon painter Vasily Guryanov was involved in the painting and interior decoration of the house church of the Diocesan House. In 1930, after the transfer of the cathedral chamber, which was closed by that time, to the Mezhrabpomfilm society, the building was completely rebuilt in the constructivist style. An additional 4 floors appeared above the right wing, the bell tower and the golden dome of the Vladimir Church were demolished. And up to the 1990s, a film factory functioned here.
The restorers were given the task of returning the building to the appearance of a cathedral chamber. According to the Department of Cultural Heritage of Moscow, it was necessary to restore the ceiling from photographs, to disassemble the completely blocked windows in the former cinema, to restore the decor bit by bit and return the interiors to their original color. The chief architect of the restoration project, Sergei Kupriyanov, noted that only the decoration of the walls had survived relatively well under the plaster layer of the 1930s.
But the constructivist building, of course, has been completely lost. *** Nomination "Objects of monumental art"
57 gravestones of the Novodevichy cemetery
Almost sixty monuments have been put in order at the Novodevichy cemetery. The monument and the fence of the monument to the Chekhov family, which were badly damaged by rain and snow, had to be repaired long and painstakingly: cracks were repaired, and traces of corrosion were removed. The monument to Galina Ulanova made of rare white marble darkened strongly and began to crumble. It urgently needed to be strengthened and cleared of temporary plaque. The accumulations of harmful bacteria that were destroying it were removed from the marble statue of Nadezhda Alliluyeva. An individually selected set of works was applied to each tombstone.
*** Nomination "Objects of archaeological heritage"
Church of Elijah the Prophet in the Novgorod courtyard
The Church of Elijah the Prophet on Ilyinka, with a crumbling vault and arched panels of the facade, similar to the church near Moscow in the village of Yurkina, was built in the first half of the 16th century, before the Cathedral of St. Basil the Blessed, and thus, it is the oldest surviving comparatively complete temple of Kitay-gorod. The building of the temple was investigated in the early 2000s. During recent archaeological research, a 17th century tombstone, brick floors and foundations of the gallery walls from the same period, the foundations of the 15th – 16th centuries and the remains of a brick wall of the apse of a later temple were discovered. ***
