Archi.ru:
What, in your opinion, is the benefit of this workshop for its participants?
Julius Borisov:
- My educational task was to explain to the listeners that it is not the form or the picture of the design of the public space that is important. First of all, you need to comprehend the problem, formulate it and understand what kind of project actions can solve the problems of specific people. I try to break the same stereotype at the Moscow Architectural Institute, where I teach. Unfortunately, our education pays very little attention to analysis and goal setting, and much more to graphics. But graphics alone cannot improve people's lives. You can brighten it up with graphics.
How was the workshop organized?
- There were six mentor-tutors and, accordingly, six groups, each of which got its own task. There were ten to twelve participants in groups: officials, practicing architects, the local Architectural Troopers, who work on public spaces in Tatarstan, and a few students.
What task did your group work on?
- I was given the village of Staroye Drozhzhanoe with a population of 4,000 people in the outback of Tatarstan. He has the same problems as almost all villages in Russia: a degraded environment, an outflow of the population, especially young people; it is not clear what to do there. Formally, we were faced with the task of developing an improvement project: public areas, parks, walking routes - which, in the opinion of the authorities, should solve the problems of the village. However, the main problem is different: it is necessary to change the trend of the “unfashionable” settlement.
Now all over the world the concept of slow-life is super demanded, when people live in ecologically clean places where it is possible to work via the Internet, where there is a normal environment for children and adults. So far, many people do not understand the value of such a life in our country. Our project was an example of how things can be changed.
Did you develop it together with the audience?
- My role was rather to teach and advise. The audience, among them serious practicing architects, did a very deep analysis. They went to the site, studied the survey data, talked with the head of the district, who provided good support and was very interested in the work. As it turned out, serious budgets are being spent: they are building sports complexes, hospitals, and schools, but the problem is that all this is happening pointwise, isolated. There is no main program - neither urban nor semantic. Therefore, actions do not lead to the desired result.
The second problem is that although some industrial sites are being prepared, there is no clear concept that can be announced to both residents and investors. We have analyzed what resources this village possesses. It turned out that there is a luxurious black soil and rare natural materials that can be used in construction. And we came up with the idea of an eco-settlement that produces clean building materials and clean food. The topic is not very new, but it is applicable for the region, there are all the prerequisites for it.
Then my group developed a program - how to attract people. It was decided to build a center - it will demonstrate the future of the settlement to investors and residents, as well as a pilot eco-house, public spaces - both entertaining and educational that tell what ecology is.
How long did this work last and what are the prospects for implementation?
- The whole project was created in just six days. It has already been presented to the Minister of Construction; both the republican authorities and the regional administration are interested in it. The result is quite serious. Perhaps not completely, but in parts it will begin to be implemented, and in the future, sooner or later, it will be fully embodied. I was very surprised and even aroused a certain envy by the attention with which the officials of Tatarstan treat architectural actions, and the fact that they understand the value of those tools for creating the environment that the architect owns.
Why did you decide to take part in the Spring March?
- My trip to Kazan was interrupted three times. I had never been there and decided that from the fourth time I would come and visit Innopolis. Since this is the first city built from scratch in many, many years, any architect who practices in Russia should see it. Secondly, according to the reviews of many of my colleagues, Tatarstan is a very dynamic region, where, in the meantime, as something is said, and then drawn and implemented, an extremely short time passes. I became convinced that this is actually the case. And thirdly, since I am teaching at the Moscow Architectural Institute, it was interesting for me to look at the level of students, practicing architects, and officials-architects in the regions. The program gave me such an opportunity: the acting architects showed a fairly high class, it is comparable to the Moscow one, and the students whom we taught on the project have a great desire to develop and have good technical skills.
*** The composition of the team under the guidance of tutor Yulia Borisova at MARSH Lab 2017: Eduard Gubeev, Artem Malykhin, Nastya Yaremenko, Emil Sirazetdinov, Ilya Igin, Ravil Safiullin, Merine Grigoryan, Kirill Chunaev, Iskander Rauzeev, Sirinashilia Arafutdinova, Lilia.
