It is proposed to build a multifunctional residential complex on the banks of the Moskva River, along the Simonovskaya embankment. The Simonov Monastery and the Church of the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary, partially preserved after the demolition in the 1930s, are located in the immediate vicinity.
About a year ago, a competition was held for the concept of building this zone within the framework of the project for the development of the coastal territories of the Moskva River, which resulted in a planning project. According to him, the entire site is divided into three parts. The first one was saved to house the Torpedo stadium, which will be reconstructed according to the project of Dmitry Bush. The other two are set aside for the construction of the first and second stages of housing. The entire territory will be riddled with pedestrian routes connecting the city with the embankment. At the second stage, the embankment is planned to be made pedestrian, bypassing the existing six-lane highway. As for the first stage, the project of which was submitted to the Architectural Council, here the residential buildings will remain a road cut off from the river. At the same time, it is planned to narrow the highway to four lanes and provide for ground pedestrian crossings. This is how the authors of the project from the bureau "Tsimailo, Lyashenko and Partners" solve the problem of the lack of free access to water.
The complex consists of six separate buildings with variable number of storeys. Closer to the embankment is the lowest, 11-storey block, which forms a closed quarter with a private courtyard and a built-in kindergarten. The block is designed in light gray tones; it is planned to use light brick and glass in its decoration. The first line also includes two trapezoidal residential buildings reaching 13 floors. They are distinguished from the calmly settled block by a stepped structure with a noticeable taper in the upper part and finishing of chocolate-colored clinker tiles. A little further from the coastal zone, there are three tall towers expanding from below, the highest of them is 29-storey. For them, the authors offer identical facades, faced with light glossy tiles. Window openings add variety: the windows facing the river, with maximum opening to the main viewpoints, are noticeably larger in size.
As Nikolai Lyashenko said, in all buildings, the two lower floors from the side of the embankment will be given for a commercial function, and the courtyards will become a comfortable public space.
Anticipating the discussion of the project, the council members were asked to evaluate the results of the landscape-visual analysis, which showed that the scale of construction permitted by the GPZU would negatively affect the perception of the panorama of the Simonov Monastery. It was possible to agree with the dimensions of the building only with great reservations, by redistributing the volumes and providing for visual gaps that preserve the view of one of the monastery towers. The chief architect of Moscow, Sergei Kuznetsov, did not quite agree with the experts. He recalled that the Simonov Monastery ceased to exist as an ensemble back in the 1930s. At present, this complex, in his opinion, is quite remote from the river and hidden behind the park greenery, so new construction will practically not affect the perception of its surviving buildings.
Most of the council members did not agree with the arguments of the chief architect. Nikolai Shumakov expressed regret over the decisions to "cut off the river" by road and "finally finish off the panorama of the monastery." Andrei Bokov expressed his dissatisfaction with the transport scheme and the general urban planning concept. He did not support the idea of preserving the highway, which cuts off the complex from the river. For Bokov, it remained unclear why the highway was not allowed to bypass the complex, following the example of the neighboring area, where this could create a more humane and safe environment. The designers tried to explain such a design proposal by the existing relief and numerous technical constraints.
Alexander Kudryavtsev also supported his colleagues. He also drew attention to the fact that the complex does not react in any way to the two main dominants of the place - the river and the Simonov monastery. According to Kudryavtsev, the authors should be more delicate about the already badly damaged architectural monument. The development from the side of the river reminded Kudryavtsev of factory buildings - too large, straightforward and monolithic.
Alexey Vorontsov noted the scale of the work done, the serious approach and professionalism of the authors. Vorontsov tried to justify the insufficiently respectful attitude of the new buildings towards the monastery by the fact that at present, little of the monastery has survived. “They disrespected the monastery back in the 1930s,” Vorontsov explained his position. - Then the ensemble was destroyed with its main dominant overlooking the river - the bell tower. The Vesnin brothers built DK ZIL on the site of the demolished monastery buildings and turned it towards the street, caring little about the view from the river. Based on this, the issue of interaction with the monastery, according to Vorontsov, is not so important today. It is more important to create a high-quality new embankment facade. And in this respect, the proposed monotonous facades of residential buildings did not seem very convincing to Vorontsov.
Andrei Gnezdilov, on the contrary, noted the high quality of the architectural image, however, the scenario of life in the new space seemed ill-conceived to him. “This is not life, but an image of life,” explained Gnezdilov. - A beautifully drawn public space will not be saturated and in demand if free access to the territory is not provided. It's the same with the commercial ground floors. The site, bounded on all sides by highways, acquired an island character. The space is cut off from the city and therefore useless."
Sergei Kuznetsov, after listening to the opinions of his colleagues, proposed to postpone the approval of the project. He asked the authors to pay special attention to the themes of river interaction and the development of public spaces. He also invited the designers to listen to individual comments and think about the solution of the facades. At the same time, he himself admitted that he liked their brevity and softness of drawing. On behalf of the committee, Kuznetsov promised to raise the issue of the transport scheme in order to try to find an optimal solution.
