I must admit that, looking back at the past year, it is not so easy to find events of special significance: those that you immediately know about - this is it, something that will determine the vector of development of architecture for the next couple of decades. Or - this is an event after which the architecture will never be the same. Somehow our time is scarce for manifestos and style-forming buildings. Even the ideas of sustainable and socially oriented architecture have become the norm and have lost their sharpness, which are still declared as key themes at the largest architectural exhibitions. For example, the Venice Biennale, which was held under the motto "Reporting from the Front" by Alejandro Aravena, despite the fact that it attracted a record number of visitors, did not provoke any significant professional discussion. At the WAF World Architecture Festival in Berlin, social program and value to the community were already seen as a mandatory part of every project, along with spatial and planning solutions. It is not surprising that almost none of the Russian architects we interviewed named these two global events of architectural life among the most significant.
Perhaps the most important thing in 2016 was a sad event - an unexpected death.
Zaha Hadid on the last day of March came as a shock to everyone. It became clear how much the courage of her work and her largely fantastic career meant in the context of modern architecture. I dare say that in our memory, the death of not a single, even the most eminent and iconic architect, did not produce such an effect. As it turned out, the architectural world has enough of its kings of various stripes and scales, but the queen was alone and her loss was a serious shock for the masculine professional community.
Many publications about Zach in the spring and then - every news related to the work of the bureau - attracted constant attention throughout the year. The retrospective exhibition of Zaha, which opened in Venice in parallel with the Biennale of Architecture, aroused great interest; the composition of the exposition was not new, but the exhibition seemed to allow the whole world to say goodbye to Hadid with dignity.
In Russia, the victory of the project by Zaha Hadid architects in the competition for the Technopark complex of Sberbank of Russia in the Skolkovo IC received a great response. It must be admitted that with all the unconditional merits of the project, this victory also turned out to be in some way a memorial, one of those that are not discussed.
Otherwise, architectural life in the world went on as usual. 2016 did not give the world a new style. Numerous experiments with forms and space continue, but they are more of an exercise in originality than an expression of a deep and heartfelt search for a new path for the development of modern architecture. However, the global level of development of construction technologies in the world is such that even the most insane architectural exercises in terms of plasticity are perceived calmly. If something attracts special attention of the community, it is not the “triumph of constructive thought”, but the financial component, which, against the background of the economic crisis, received the status of “a decent topic for discussion”.
In this sense, Russian architecture is no exception to global trends. Having replaced the recent search for identity, which was preceded by the search for innovativeness, economics has confidently come to the fore and the task of creating projects is not so much outstanding as sold and, moreover, implemented in the new sanctions realities. The economic aspect of one degree or another has become the leitmotif of the architectural and construction industry.
Much has been written about the crisis, we are almost used to it; for most architects, the crisis has become a reality, significantly changing the volume, composition and typology of the order. Many started projects are frozen, many are radically changing following market trends. Office real estate is not in use, but housing, lower in class and with more compact apartments, still finds its buyer, as well as shopping and entertainment facilities. But behind each project, the specter of profitability is felt: the authors are looking for solutions that can impress the spoiled buyer, using social and cultural programming tools and improving the quality of architecture, including mass residential development. Several leading architectural firms are involved in large projects at once - this is a trend of the last five years - which are tasked with creating architecture that is unique in terms of environmental, aesthetic and consumer qualities. The largest example is ZILART by LSR.
The economic situation is reflected in the customer's typology. The companies that survived in the construction market grow due to the absorbed assets of the retired players. Large development companies are looking for equally reliable and versatile designers who are ready to provide a full range of services, including guarantees for the approval of their projects in the appropriate authorities. This leads to a redistribution of the market, where bureaus with well-established connections and the right reputation get the palm. The results of the redistribution were clearly demonstrated by the summer study of the Moscow situation in the "Book of Useful and Beautiful Architecture" prepared by KB "Strelka" for the Moscow Urban Forum 2016. However, along with the consolidation of leading design companies, there was a noticeable increase in the number of young and actively declaring themselves architectural bureaus. noted by many of our respondents, in particular, Sergei Tchoban.
The ability to work with budget funds and receive orders from government agencies is becoming a vital skill that allows you to move to a completely new and unusual price level for most design organizations in the country. This does not always work out, but one of the sonorous examples is the work of KB Strelka on
standards and rules of civilization of the central streets of Moscow for the program of the Moscow government "My Street". Many, to put it mildly, skeptically perceived 1.8 billion rubles as the cost of this work in two years: in the ensuing discussion, which even affected politicians, the cost of the issue was mentioned almost more often than the shortcomings of the principle of a unified approach to the arrangement of city streets with the transfer of priority from cars to pedestrians in standardized formats. Discussion of the principles of reconstruction of streets and public spaces in the center of Moscow continued throughout the year, intensifying after the summer rains, as well as the "Night of Long Buckets" and the announcement of the results of the competition for the concept of the improvement of Tverskaya Street, where the Plan_B bureau from Yaroslavl won.
The discussion acquired a special intensity after
articles by one of the partners of KB Strelka, Grigory Revzin, seemingly aimed at smoothing out the conflict and explaining the principles of work under the new standards. The fact is interesting for the unpredictable - or, on the contrary, predictable in a chess-like manner - reactions of the audience, who had previously favored Strelka. Perhaps the resonance of this article confirms the still enormous importance of the media for public opinion. It will be interesting to observe the development of the topic next year, when about 70 more Moscow streets will undergo reconstruction.
In addition to attracting mass attention to the quality and comfort of the streets, which Muscovites are now interested in with no less enthusiasm than the weather - and with the same success - the story of the beautification of the central streets had several global consequences. First of all, at the state level, the experiment was recognized as successful and will be broadcast in the form of individual improvement standards for 40 cities and 319 single-industry towns in Russia, again by Strelka KB for the now 3.8 billion rubles within the framework of the Urban Environment national project.
Unsurprisingly, urban issues figured prominently in our survey, with a polarizing response. Oleg Shapiro considers the interest in the quality of the environment at the state level to be a positive trend, and Yuliy Borisov noted the importance of the ongoing awareness of the problems of the urban planning industry at the government level. Aleksandr Skokan, on the contrary, was skeptical about the consequences of the capital's storming in the area of improvement - as a discrediting topic in general. Strictly speaking, these positions are not at all opposite: on the one hand, Russian cities have been waiting for improvement for three decades, on the other hand, the methods of its implementation are not in vain that arouse the rejection of residents and criticism of many professionals. The successes of "small deeds" on a gigantic scale of paving, placing benches and planting many lindens do not remove any economic doubts - is it not a feast during the plague? - no need to solve other, much more complex and deep urban planning problems throughout the country, including the capital - the very issues that are still on the periphery of public discussion and outside the focus of attention of the authorities. There are many of them: from the lack of all kinds of infrastructure to the overwhelming density of high-rise housing construction. ***
Perhaps the general enthusiasm for the applied aspects of urban studies, thanks to which specialized educational institutions began to develop actively, will be able to influence the development of the situation. In 2016, the Higher School of Urbanism (HSE) and the Strelka Institute for Media, Architecture and Design launched a joint Master's program Advanced Urban Design. And literally on the eve of the New Year, the International Laboratory for Experimental Urban Design began working under the leadership of the former chief architect of Barcelona, Vicente Guayart. The authority and seriousness of the experts behind these projects give rise to hope that in a few years the number of competent specialists will be able to qualitatively change the situation with urban planning in the country.
In 2016, the urban planning theme sounded, albeit weaker than in 2015, and in a competitive format. The Committee for Urban Planning and Architecture of St. Petersburg held a closed international competition to develop a concept for transforming the historic industrial "Gray Belt" of St. Petersburg. Most likely, the competition was in the nature of brain storming, aimed at collecting expert opinions on possible ways to solve a large-scale problem.
Following the example of Kaliningrad, Chelyabinsk announced
an international competition for a city center development project, in which everyone could participate, but only 30 teams submitted applications, of which five were selected for the second round. The results will be announced in 2017. It cannot be said that now the competition inspires a lot of optimism - ideas of this scale do not always live up to implementation. But Chelyabinsk has a certain chance, since the summit of the countries of the Shanghai region (SOSH) is planned to be held in the city in 2020. In this connection, the city held another Archchel 2020 competition, open and much more resounding, for the project of the congress center, the reconstruction of the airport and the improvement of the embankments; here there were significantly more applications - 350.
The rest of the competition practice in 2016, unlike the previous year, turned out to be a barren crop for high-profile and significant events. Few of the competitions held marked the areas of special attention from customers, mainly city and federal. Commercial customers have adopted a competitive format either in its closed form - for serious projects, or in a public format - to solve marketing problems. From the publicly available competitions, one can recall two competitions at the metro station, whose wide PR confirms that the focus of the Moscow government's attention is still focused on the transport infrastructure, the composition of which was replenished in 2016 with a new ring - in the process of implementation it was called the Small Ring of the Moscow Railway, and then turned in the MCC: Moscow Central Circle. ***
One of the notable non-governmental initiatives that united several topical topics: redevelopment, the formation of social and cultural centers, the development of recreational infrastructure and public spaces in various cities of Russia was the project "Signs of cities", initiated and organized by the Agency "Communication Rules", with the support of the community ARCHiPEOPLE and other organizations. A conference and an exhibition took place at Arch Moscow, and the first awards were presented to the prize of the same name, which promises to be annual.
By itself
Arch Moscow has shown rather an example of respectable resilience, valuable during the economic downturn, but alien to the search for new, fresh or even provocative solutions. Perhaps the only surprise was the award of the title of "Architect of the Year", which had previously passed from one Muscovite to another, St. Petersburg resident Nikita Yavein. Against this background, the search for a new format for "Architecture", initiated several years ago by its curators Andrey and Nikita Asadov, looks more fruitful, since the festival for the first time left expensive exhibition spaces, moving to factory buildings following the example of the Shenzhen Biennale.
Ambiguity in exposure
the Russian pavilion at the Venice Biennale of Architecture also does not allow us to call it an unconditional event of the year. On the one hand, it caused a lot of discussions, which is good, on the other hand, the tendency to speak categorically out of place at the Biennale has become somewhat commonplace over the years. The "achievements" of VDNKh half a century ago, reflected in the plaster statues of collective farmers and bulls, as well as the unexpectedly consonant panoramas of a modern skating rink, the largest in the world, were more attuned to post-Soviet nostalgia or a neo-Soviet attraction than to reflections on the social significance of recreational spaces.
Against the background of the pathetic Russian pavilion, the installation was acutely and deeply perceived
"Shelter of a lonely chess player", built by Alexander Brodsky, whom the curator of the Biennale Alejandro Aravena personally invited to participate. The rickety barn, frozen on the edge of the stone embankment of the Arsenal, with its poetry and absurdity attracted everyone's attention, forcing them to stop and feel at least part of the associations laid down by the author.
We will be able to assess the consequences of several events of the outgoing year only in the next, and maybe even later. It is not yet known who will take the post of director of the Museum of Architecture. A. V. Shchusev, left in early December by Irina Korobyina; the reasons for the resignation have not yet been disclosed.
Among the events with delayed consequences can also be attributed to the election of Nikolai Shumakov to the post of President of the Union of Architects of Russia, who decided not to leave the post of President of the Union of Moscow Architects, uniting under his leadership the all-Russian organization and its local branch and optimizing the work of two administrative offices. The reorganization of the structure of the Union is long overdue, but it is difficult to imagine that this is the main problem of the professional association of Russian architects, which does not have a sufficient number of authoritative members to manage each organization separately. ***
Our review of the results of the outgoing year was not very encouraging; but not that pessimistic either. The absence of grandiose successes and a resounding agenda does not mean complete silence; it can also mean hard work. Many bureaus have celebrated anniversaries, held exhibitions and published catalogs of their projects. All together they form a curious cross-section of the history of private architectural workshops for about a quarter of a century: 25, 15 and 10 years. From exhibitions and books it is clear that there are many projects, among them there are both significant and large-scale; a lot is being realized. If you look closely, it's not such a crisis.
We thank all the architects who took part in our survey and invite our readers to add to the list of significant events in 2016 in the comments.
