We asked the architects the following question: since the 21st century, in connection with the transition to a post-industrial city and ecological ideology, reconstruction has been one way or another relevant. Has there been a surge in the relevance of reconstruction in recent years?
Pavel Andreev, Gran
“The sustained interest in reconstruction is a natural process. At first, people who owned post-industrial sites tried to cleanse them of all production and lease them, which was much more profitable than engaging in production. But today they are thinking about how to further increase profitability. In addition, the number of construction sites in Moscow is decreasing, and large monopoly companies are taking them over. In these conditions, industrial zones located near the city center are potential places for development. I don't see any particular surge in the relevance of reconstruction, but there is a constant trend. The owners of industrial zones are reconstructing existing enterprises or moving them out of town, tidying up the rest of the industrial area and adapting, first of all, of course, for housing, because it is easier to sell, but also for public functions. So, if the answer to the question about the relevance of the reconstruction is short, the answer is “yes”. ***
Evgeny Ass, Architects Ass, rector of MARSH
“If we can talk about anything, it is about the liberation of a huge number of very high-quality industrial territories that has been taking place in recent years in connection with the withdrawal of production facilities. Not everything here falls under the concept of reconstruction, and even more so scientific restoration, which, of course, can be regretted. I mean that many territories are simply cleared for new construction, such as the territory of the Hammer and Sickle plant. ZIL is also not so much reconstruction as the development of the territory. And there are many such examples. At the Flacon plant, in fact, no constructive measures were taken, but it was, as it were, slightly tinted. This is a device for use. And serious reconstruction can be counted on one hand. What Michelson and Renzo Piano are doing with HPP-2 [co-authors APEX - approx. Ed.] - serious exemplary work.
The Museum of Russian Impressionism on the Bolshevik or the Museum of Russian Realistic Art - this also looks like a reconstruction. The main advantages of architecture have been preserved there, and the buildings have been brought up to date. It should be understood that for the client, reconstruction is an expensive undertaking and, in some way, a waste of effort and money. When it comes to cultural institutions like the aforementioned museums, there is a business interest in creating a high-quality environment that presupposes a loving attitude towards the historical heritage.
In other cases, it is easier for the client to destroy everything and build something new. Our project, the Nizhny Novgorod Arsenal, is a case of the customer's reverent attitude, the NCCA, to the reconstruction process, for which I am very grateful to them.
I think that the trend towards a loving attitude towards heritage among developers is not yet very common. The buildings of the 19th century are still relatively well treated. And constructivist monuments of the 20th century (for example, in Yekaterinburg) are generally mistreated. What happened to the plant"
Truth, - some kind of mockery of history. In order to use ceramics, a veneering competition was announced to distort the beautiful building with modern horror. Perhaps Izvestia is an example of a careful attitude to the heritage of the 20th century.
So I don't see any particular trend of reconstruction. The architects may have a desire to reconstruct, but the client perceives it as a burden. ***
Mikhail Beilin, Citizenstudio
“Moscow has everything to develop intensively, not extensively. Industrial zones and industrial areas in general, abandoned areas of the rust belt - this is a huge potential. There is no need to attach anything, change the boundaries. This obviously actualizes the renovation. But the main thing is that if you do not engage in reconstruction, its sad alternative is demolition. This is cleaning out the features of the city, erasing its face, replacing fabric. Reconstruction is the new life of the same city. Preserving its identity, but giving new meaning and new history. It seems to me that over time, the demand for urban identity will increase. This would be natural for the development of society and the Citizen. For me, being able to come up with this new life, preserving and restoring, is the most exciting challenge. Participation in both creation and re-creation at the same time is akin to magic. And the main thing is to work with the drama and history of the city, to be absolutely involved. ***
Alexey Ginzburg, Ginzburg architects
“The trend towards global transformations was typical of the last century, as cities were destroyed after the Second World War and required new construction. Plus, in the first half of the 20th century, against the background of the industrial revolution, there was a strong tendency to create design cities. This trend has changed to a more local one, characteristic of historical cities, which require more reconstruction and restoration than new construction. In Russia, changes have taken place in recent years. This is due to the fact that society begins to realize the value of material culture.
If earlier, 15-20 years ago, they preferred to build a new building, it seemed simpler, but now the point of view of city defenders has become more influential, society understands the value of heritage. And we are talking not only about monuments, but also about simply worthy, old buildings with history, their value, including commercial, is recognized. If we talk about the urban fabric, then it is important not only to preserve point objects of cultural heritage, but also ordinary buildings. The accumulated baggage of the historic city is not that shabby. If we destroy it, we get remakes.
Reconstruction is a natural process that does not destroy the historical environment, but complements the restoration of unique objects, adapts the historical environment to the new needs of society. Better to act delicately, piece by piece. Investors are beginning to realize that an old house or part of a house is some kind of value that increases the capitalization of the project. For example, we reconstructed a building on Trekhgorny Val, which was built on a lot during the Soviet era. We have preserved all the old interesting walls in it. We did another reconstruction project on Gilyarovskogo Street, and the customer had a legal opportunity to demolish the building, but we convinced him not to do this. Of course, it would be better to include all the old buildings in the list of protected ones, but until this happens, you can act as we do. ***
Yuri Grigoryan, Megan
“There is a big problem with the reconstruction: nobody wants to deal with the reconstruction. Everyone wants to demolish the building, the maximum is to leave the old facade, and it is better to break it down and build a remake. Here is the attitude of private development to reconstruction. They have two ways of doing things. The first, the most vegetarian, is the simple use of the old building. You take, for example, "ArtPlay" or "Red October", give the premises to tenants, and they themselves do everything in them that is not prohibited by the protection of monuments. The second and main way is to break everything on the site and rebuild it. Therefore, reconstruction is such an interesting genre that we do not have. Reconstruction is the preservation of most of the old building, and it is considered more expensive than new construction, although no one can prove this, since almost no one has such experience. Restoration is really expensive, and this is quite natural, since you are working with an architectural monument. And reconstruction is when an old building, not a monument, becomes an object of action. Let's say Koolhaas is now engaged in the Tretyakov Gallery on Krymsky Val - this is a classic reconstruction. Reconstructions include his Garage Museum in Gorky Park or Herzog and de Meuron's Tate Gallery in London.
What was, preserved and completed a new one. It is not cheap and prestigious, and in our country only wealthy connoisseurs of culture or the state can afford it, and only in special cases. Therefore, there can be no surge by definition. But there is a surge in the demolition of good and important buildings. In anticipation of possible demolition for residential areas, the factory "Red Bogatyr" and much more. In the end, the developers refused to save the fire station and the facades of the avant-garde workshops on the territory of the ZIL plant - high costs, and the city community showed no interest in preserving it. So from a cultural and professional point of view, everything is not in order with the reconstruction - there are few monuments, and any good solid building is under the threat of demolition. And practice shows that the architecture of new buildings is almost always worse than those demolished in this place. " ***
DNA ag: Daniil Lorenz, Natalia Sidorova, Konstantin Khodnev
“The redevelopment of former industrial territories is really relevant today, especially in Moscow. Today in these territories the production of an industrial product has given way to the “production of square meters” of residential construction, which brings considerable income.
A significant part of industrial territories is located within the boundaries of old Moscow, in developed areas with an established infrastructure, therefore, such plots, with a general shortage of free land for development, are becoming especially demanded by developers. Reconstruction and adaptation of historical objects of industrial architecture make up the historical fabric of the city, which is quite thin in our country, therefore, such work is very important and relevant.
The launch of the Moscow Railway and the modernization of the transport infrastructure have actualized the value of the former industrial territories of the middle belt of Moscow and their main location. ***
Valery Lukomsky, CityArch
“In my opinion, reconstruction, and generally working with historical buildings, is one of the most interesting tasks for an architect. A kind of aerobatics - to comprehend a building built in another era, to make it modern, to give it a new life.
Regarding the popularity of reconstruction, I think this trend will continue. The growing urbanization makes cities the same, levels their features. It is imperative to preserve the buildings that define the spirit and uniqueness of the place. Such unique places attract tourists - but they need to be made comfortable, while preserving the valuable.
One of our recent projects was the development, commissioned by the Ministry of Culture of Belarus, of a master plan for the historical center of Vitebsk, "Shagalovsky Quarter". We needed to neutralize the destructive impact of the Soviet highway, show the morphology of space, identify and emphasize monuments, following the scheme outlined by the Research and Development Institute of the General Plan. This can be called a kind of reconstruction of the city, in the post-Soviet territory there are a lot of cities in need of such work.
We were directly involved in the reconstruction in 2009-2011, working on the first stage of the Danilovskaya manufactory. At that moment we were lucky with the customer, KR Properties. We kept everything that made sense and was possible to keep, we carried out the masonry removal and conservation. Unfortunately, it didn’t work that way with the second stage: the team we worked with on the developer's side changed, and our concept was handed over to a Turkish company for implementation - as a result, there is more of a remake.
Reconstruction is a complex and costly business. Interest on the part of the customer is important here - as a rule, it is easier and cheaper to demolish and build a new one. But we must not forget that reconstruction does not make sense in every territory: there are such “shanghai” where, even with a great desire, nothing can be saved - in this case, it is necessary to convey the spirit of the place in a new object, through visual or spatial hints”. ***
Nikolay Pereslegin, Kleinewelt Architekten
“In the context of reconstruction, it makes sense to perceive many processes of extending the life of old and not very old buildings, since many houses built in the 20th and early 11th centuries are not always made with high quality - both in terms of materials and general construction culture, and in terms of aesthetics. With rare exceptions, it can hardly be perceived otherwise as a temporary hut on a very expensive land.
In this regard, I would take the concept of "reconstruction" somewhat broader: Western sources have about ten different "re", and they all differ in approaches, methods and volumes of work performed. So, for example, in Western practice, the concepts of "rehabilitation" and "adaptation" are distinguished. In our country, apparently, this is all - reconstruction. And if we perceive the reconstruction in this context, then we still have a lot of work in this sense, just an unplowed field, it is enough to look around. And now we are only at the very beginning of this path, here we are working for several generations ahead: repairing the world is always much more difficult and longer than creating it anew.
Today, trends in the global economy are changing and, as a result, priorities at the macro level. From global megaprojects, the vector is shifting to a local improvement in the quality of what has already been created before us: hence the improvement of urban areas or a more attentive attitude to our entrance and courtyard, which is possible only in the case of our responsible civil attitude. What is commonly called reconstruction is completely in this trend, I think we can record the current interest in this topic. ***
Sergey Trukhanov, T + T Architects
“Of course, I look forward to the renewal of interest in reconstruction, especially in Moscow. And in my opinion, this will be connected not so much with new acts as with the large-scale development of the city's territories, which will now be actively built up within the framework of the renovation program. One way or another, these large-scale interventions in the urban environment will affect the existing urban context, and this will inevitably be followed by the need for reconstruction of buildings located directly on this territory or bordering it. These buildings can have not only architectural or historical value, but also important functional and infrastructural significance for these territories. These can be public centers and houses of culture, museums and retail, business centers and facilities located in the former industrial territories and adjacent to the renovation zones. All of this can become interesting for reconstruction due to the increase in the attractiveness and potential of the development area. For the same reason, "abandoned", empty and non-functioning objects, but which, due to their architecture or location, can form the environment of the district, can also get under reconstruction. Finding the right function to restart will be crucial for them.” ***
Oleg Shapiro, Wowhaus
“In the context of the development of any historical city, reconstruction is a common, expensive, but necessary measure. She was, is and will be. But reconstruction can become a successful and commercially profitable project only when developers, and not just architects, believe in it. A good example that has become a trend is the increased interest in the preservation of the so-called industrial territories of the late 19th - early 20th centuries, which arose in Moscow 8-10 years ago, starting with Winzavod, and still remains relevant. ***
