Residential complex on Novocheremushkinskaya street
The residential complex with a training center and an underground parking lot is supposed to be built at the intersection of Novocheremushkinskaya and Dmitry Ulyanov streets, 700 meters from the Akademicheskaya metro station. Currently, the site is occupied by low-rise buildings, which are determined for demolition. As one of the project authors from the APEX bureau explained, the existing buildings are of no historical value: in the 19th century, a brick factory was located in their place, but all of its buildings were demolished in the middle of the last century. The nearby territories were occupied by residential quarters, and later - by the Soviet microdistrict buildings. The result is an extremely heterogeneous environment.
Nevertheless, the authors tried to take into account the context as much as possible. It was decided to level the front of the streets by filling the existing gap at the site of the demolished low-rise buildings with houses that are commensurate with the surroundings. In addition, it was necessary to accentuate the corner where the two streets intersect. This task is handled by a 21-storey tower, towering over a new residential complex, designed in the form of a closed quarter. Inside, a regular rectangular courtyard is formed, protected from all sides by residential buildings and free from cars, for which an underground parking with a capacity of 650 cars is provided. The courtyard is closed, private, intended only for residents. A high-quality improvement is provided inside: a dry fountain, a pergola, a children's all-season slide.
The main public space is a small town square along the street. And precisely for the purpose of its construction, the entire complex noticeably recedes from the red line into the depths of the site. For the public area, the designers proposed three solutions: a standard landscaping with lighting and outdoor furniture, a cantilever over the square, inside which a training center can be located, and the construction of a detached compact building in front of the complex that can accommodate all public functions. All the first floors are also given over to commercial and social use. Penthouses are planned on the upper tiers. The entrances are made through.
In the choice of colors, the new complex is also in solidarity with its neighbors. The architects presented two options to the council, but both use dark clinker bricks in combination with perforated metal. In the decoration of the stylobate part, it is possible to use arch concrete.
Anticipating the discussion of the project, Sergei Kuznetsov explained why it was decided to submit it for consideration: “The issue of introducing new development into the existing one for Moscow is becoming systemic. With this specific example, we can look at the main problems and work out ways to solve them."
The main difficulty of this particular project was called the indent from the red line by the council members. Andrei Bokov pointed out to the authors that their intentions are at odds with their actions: “You are talking about the formation of a street front, but instead you are destroying it. An unmotivated deviation from the red line and the absence of a social component are the main problem of the project, Bokov concluded.
Sergey Tchoban also agreed with his colleague. He admitted that the project evokes mixed feelings in him: on the one hand, it should be noted that the architecture of the complex looks convincing and modern, on the other, serious flaws are obvious. The main one, according to Tchoban, is the focus of attention on the firewall of the neighboring house. The new complex is being introduced into a block of not too high architectural and urban planning quality, but at the same time it does everything to expose and emphasize its surroundings. The arrangement of the area even more focuses on the surrounding buildings, leveling the dignity of the new residential quarter. Sergei Tchoban is sure that the authors should have thought about a more complex and expressive urban planning solution.
Tchoban's thought was again picked up by Andrey Bokov. He reproached the architects for the fact that the search for a geometrically correct form, a verified composition and fashionable architecture turned out to be more valuable for them than the search for the right urban planning solution. The created model, according to Bokov, is good in itself, without being tied to a place. But here it does not work in the best way: it does not form intra-quarter pedestrian connections, does not consolidate, but fences itself off from neighbors, and even the tower, designed to be the dominant, cannot cope with its role. The authors make too many elevation changes, although two would be enough - Bokov is convinced.
Sergei Kuznetsov made a comment on the organization of the entrance to the underground parking from the side of Novocheremushkinskaya Street. In his opinion, it is more correct to organize the entrance from Dmitry Ulyanov Street. Kuznetsov was supported by Vladimir Plotkin, who noted that such a transport scheme provokes abandoning cars on the street without entering the parking lot. In addition, Plotkin drew the authors' attention to the entrances to residential entrances, which are not accented in any way and are hardly recognizable. Alexander Kudryavtsev made a proposal to solve street and yard facades in different ways. He is confident that this will enrich and diversify the environment.
Summing up the results of the discussion, Sergey Kuznetsov noted that a large number of comments were made during the meeting. Nevertheless, the general attitude towards the project, according to him, is rather positive than negative. The main problems are the departure from the red line, the solution of the public square, the transport scheme and the lack of taking into account the history of the place where the brick factory was once located. All these problems can be eliminated in working order - concluded Sergey Kuznetsov.
IV Prize of the Archcouncil of Moscow. Second stage of voting
In the second part of the meeting, voting took place on the objects nominated for the annual Archcouncil Prize. Previously, 24 nominee projects were selected, approved by the council and received an AGR in 2016. Projects are presented in six traditional nominations: an economy-class residential building, a luxury residential building, an educational and medical facility, a public facility, an office and administrative facility, a commercial and domestic facility. The jury voting was preceded by watching video clips with a short presentation of projects. The results of voting and the names of the winners will be announced in a week, during the last meeting of the Arch Council this year.
