House on Kondratyevsky
St. Petersburg, Kondratyevsky prospect, section 3
Designer: INTERCOLUMNIUM
Customer: LLC "KVS-Kondratyevsky"
Discussed: architectural and town-planning appearance
The future residential complex will be located on Marshal Blucher Avenue in the quarter bounded by Laboratornaya Street and Kondratyevsky Avenue. Five buildings form a permeable rectangular quarter with four accent sections along the avenue, which are united by a retail gallery - part of it will be transferred to the district administration. The requested height is the maximum allowable - 54 meters, but the complex acquires a silhouette, noticeably lowering in the "flanks": one of them looks through the windows of a multi-storey parking lot of a neighboring residential complex, and the other - at a green area with a fragment of a power transmission line. The project envisages a kindergarten for 200 kids, and older children should be accommodated by a school in the next quarter, designed for 1340 places - the reality of this possibility is confirmed by a letter from the administration.
The question of the school turned out to be quite acute, but taking it out of the brackets, the experts found controversial places in the project. So, many were embarrassed by the non-orthogonal setting of the quarter in relation to Marshal Blucher Avenue, as well as the "dryness" of the architecture: given that the complex is visible from many points, and in the future there will be a metro station nearby, they suggested the dominant. It is difficult to say, seriously or as a joke, Pavel Nikonov proposed a different shape for a "unique town-planning place" - a pyramid, for example. Mikhail Mamoshin recalled that earlier experts insisted on supporting the projects under consideration with models and videos for the sake of clarity of the overall picture.
At the same time, the laconic architecture found many supporters. Mikhail Sarri considered that it does not contradict the surrounding buildings, and Anatoly Stolyarchuk noted that, given the current background, it even wins. Svyatoslav Gaykovich supported the set tone: "The purity of the forms makes the project akin to constructivism, the customer has the least chance of spoiling such an architecture." Yevgeny Gerasimov argued that "a city planner does not need to be holier than the Pope" and advocated not to shift "problems that have nothing to do with him" on Yevgeny Podgornov, meaning the set TEPs, existing norms, as well as imperfect, but all the same approved by the TPP and the letter of the administration on schools. He agreed that the architecture is dry, but “it will not cause heartburn, it’s better than the one on the Oktyabrskaya embankment - I can’t come to my senses: daisies, butterflies, the sky, cheerfulness”. “The project is solid and absolutely normal,” summed up the architect.
-
Image 
zooming 1/7 Facade from the side of Marshal Blucher Avenue. Residential building on Kondratyevsky Avenue Image courtesy of the KGA press service © INTERCOLUMNIUM
-
zooming 2/7 Facade from the side of Marshal Blucher avenue. Residential building on Kondratyevsky Avenue Image courtesy of the KGA press service © INTERCOLUMNIUM
-
zooming 3/7 Facade from the side of Marshal Blucher Avenue. Residential building on Kondratyevsky Avenue Image courtesy of the KGA press service © INTERCOLUMNIUM
-
zooming 4/7 Facade solutions from the intersection of Marshal Blucher Avenue and Labaratornaya Street. Residential building on Kondratyevsky Avenue Image courtesy of the KGA press service © INTERCOLUMNIUM
-
zooming 5/7 Facade from the side of Marshal Blucher avenue. Residential building on Kondratyevsky Avenue Image courtesy of the KGA press service © INTERCOLUMNIUM
-
zooming 6/7 Residential building on Kondratyevsky prospect Image courtesy of the KGA press service © INTERCOLUMNIUM
-
zooming 7/7 Facade solutions for preschool educational institutions. Residential building on Kondratyevsky Avenue Image courtesy of the KGA press service © INTERCOLUMNIUM
Vladimir Grigoriev welcomed the dryness of the architecture, which is close in the sense of the clarity of the concept, but noted that "the predecessors, maintaining the grid, still supported the changes in the trajectory of the street by setting the houses with ledges" large weight.
More about the project ->
House on Havanskaya
St. Petersburg, Gavanskaya street, 5, letter A
Designer: LLC "LAYERS ARKITECTS"
Customer: LLC "Alpha"
Discussed: architectural and town-planning appearance
By St. Petersburg standards, rebellious projects by Valentin Kogan get to the City Council with a frequency enviable for young bureaus. But watching a young face in the window of a conference meeting is still unusual - and the whole process instantly takes on the atmosphere of an auditorium with an amphitheater.
Valentin Efimovich presented a project of an apartment building, which should appear on the site of the Havan Baths of Vasilyevsky Island, built in 1901. According to the conclusion of the KGIOP, a third of the building retained its authenticity, but was recognized as emergency, so the demolition did not raise any objections. It turned out, however, a little later - the architect's report was short and did not include references to cultural heritage sites.
Essentially, the house in question is a seal building. But in St. Petersburg, as it turned out again, there is only a regeneration of the environment with further development. Since the house is located in the depths of the block, its permissible height is 33 meters, which is what the customer takes full advantage of. The volume of the first seven floors is a more or less simple parallelepiped with clear proportions, like
Palace of Italian Civilization. Two attic floors add intrigue - the terraces' ledges are complicated by the "folds" of the walls, all together they form a volumetric pattern with a displaced axis of symmetry, because of which the top view evokes many unnecessary associations.
The project was reviewed by Sergei Padalko - a new face in the Gradosvet. The architect noted the silhouette and plasticity and suggested lowering the height of the building to 30 meters so that it would cease to be the tallest in the quarter.
Experts rained questions about indentations, gutters, playgrounds and parking spaces. Vladimir Avrutin pointed out the importance of baths as a social object - many people still live in communal apartments and are not provided with baths. Mikhail Sarri admitted the possibility that people would throw bottles and cigarette butts from the terraces. As expected, the question arose about glazing that would violate the geometry of the facade. Nikita Yavein questioned the appropriateness of the asymmetry of the upper part of the building.
Mikhail Sarri questioned the viability of the project and saw "an indistinct architecture that unworthy techniques are supposed to save" and "a helplessly resolved master plan." It seemed that everything would go on as usual, but almost all subsequent reviews were positive and sometimes even enthusiastic. Experts wished Valentin Kogan to keep the idea after overcoming technical norms and possible conflicts - judging by
feedback from the residents of Vasilievsky Island on social networks, it really can be difficult. The majority agreed that giving up a couple of floors would benefit the building.
Sergey Oreshkin “would like to support the project with three hands”, welcomed the experimentation, noted that “it’s time to raise the quality of architecture, become more noticeable on the European market” and remembered
Frank Gehry's new customs complex in Düsseldorf, which has suddenly turned into a landmark.
Mikhail Mamoshin recalled that Konstantin Melnikov counted 27 types of symmetry. In the project, in his opinion, the asymmetry is not meaningless, since it shifts the volumes towards a point brick building. The rhythms reminded the architect of the Havana hotel, as well as the houses of Hans Kollhoff in Berlin's Mitte, which have no dividing walls on the terraces.
Evgeny Gerasimov called the project fresh, unusual and curious. And quite unexpectedly he said: “The creativity of each of us is understandable and fed up with everyone. We need fresh ideas, young authors, companies. Here we cannot do without the example of Moscow: we are not in the best position, we are not even talking about competition. We must catch up in ideas, since we cannot catch up with money."
Alexander Karpov noted the general "the same feeling: a positive attitude towards architecture and doubts about the location of the object, which is strange and impossible to discuss in the absence of the position of the KGIOP and the project of protected zones."
Vladimir Grigoriev also complimented the house: “it is interesting for Havanskaya Street”. But at the same time, "the mass is excessive, all the elements that should be in a residential building do not fit here."
More about the project ->
