What Moscow at the architect on mind the Main architect of capital Alexander
What Moscow at the architect on mind the Main architect of capital Alexander
Kuzmin - about the past and future Belokamennoj.
- Alexander Viktorovich, we live in a city, which
Varies so quickly, that we have not time to follow changes. And
To changes is exposed not only the centre, but also suburbs, so-called
"Sleeping" areas. Never on our memory Moscow built so much and
So quickly. Tell, there is in all event any law,
Any plan? In particular, the general plan?
- Certainly. poslerevoljutsionnaja Moscow did not live without general plans.
In their its history was two - 1935 and 1971. They were very different,
Because were not free from a policy, from plans for development of that
The state which accepted them as the guide to action. And if
Earlier about architecture spoke, as about the fallen asleep music now it is possible
To tell, what is it not fallen asleep even not, and the policy which has become silent in a stone.
- What policy has become silent in constructions of the general plan of 1935?
- Policy monumentalizma. It were years of industrialisation, grandiose
Plans, underground buildings, the years directed in the future and... The full
Neglects to history, traditions of a city. The old ruthlessly communicated
Buildings and, if not the war which has prevented execution of this irreproachable
On terms and erection of objects of the general plan, we would have fourteen
Absolutely identical streets Bitter, some Garden rings, and
Unique memoirs on a city which was called as Moscow, would remain only
The Kremlin.
- The general plan of 1971 was another?
- It should be another because conditions in the country varied.
We have gone through "Khruschev's thaw", already could refuse from totalitarian,
Regime architecture. But there were other problems. I remember, that on ours
Building Moskomarhitektury the huge slogan "hung we Will transform Moscow in
Exemplary communistic city ". I to this slogan always would like
To add: "In the country of the developed socialism". It was so pathos: and
Demonstration of that we should be best, and confidence, that we
All we are able, all we will overcome.
We built at that time much. It is possible to concern differently
To those "five-storey apartment blocks" which we are going to to take down and it is abused as we can, but
Recollect, how people rejoiced, leaving there from communal flats! Paradox
The general plan of 1971 - that at the big scope of its realisation of introduction
New considerable town-planning ideas has not occurred. New ideas
Have appeared only to the middle 80 and, fortunately, have been connected by that
The city began to change the relation to architectural, historical and cultural and
To natural monuments. And to the person living in Moscow. For me,
The architect, it is very important.
- Today on a review of Muscovites the third general plan most is exposed
The modern. Than it differs from two previous?
- We have tried to estimate in this plan possibilities of Moscow and Moscow
Areas to understand, that such development means for our region, that
Eternally, and that can be changed. And the most important thing, we have tried to give
Alternative variants of city building. It is the reconstruction plan
Existing city, instead of building new on a place old - here
Its main difference of that were earlier. We speak: here it to do
It is impossible, and all the rest - is possible, otherwise, it is possible to do everything, what not
It is forbidden by the law.
- What law, unless it exists?
- While is not present, but we will try to make the general plan the law
Cities. It is necessary that the general plan was above an executive power,
Above departmental interests and even above Moskomarhitektury. That anybody
Could not "press and make forcibly in a city something besides it
Interests.
- In what degree the power can affect your decision? We will tell,
Whether Luzhkov can "press" on you? That will be thus: you obey or
Can express the opinion?
- It would not be desirable to translate conversation to persons. But if to speak
About Luzhkov, at it just good town-planning intuition.
Thus I can always express to it the opinion and this opinion to defend.
With Luzhkov to me it is simple: he understands a city, understands, as well as that is necessary in him
To do.
- Well, we will leave the mayor and it is reversible to history. Each tsar everyone
The governor general depending on that or whom he wanted
To immortalise, built a city or something in a city. Today in Moscow Luzhkov
With remarkable town-planning intuition, tomorrow there will be other mayor, at
Which this intuition will not be. As you can resist
To voluntarism?
- By means of that law of Moscow which we wish to accept.
But the general plan under this law should have alternative of development cities,
That there were variants that there were answers to questions: that is possible, and that
It is impossible?
- While directive decisions, which, not a secret, nevertheless in Moscow
Are accepted, in our opinion, do a city similar to London, to Paris, on
Berlin, but at all on the mother-moskvu. There are any towers, houses,
Revetted with brilliant glass, many other things, that is beautiful, but is alien to us.
- You against towers? Then will take a detached view of the Kremlin of the Moskva River.
Towers were in Russian architecture always.
- But agree, on shape Moscow all leaves from the primordial further
Russian capital.
- Let's not speak about Russian capital, because it
It has been constructed in Petersburg and it is constructed how at that time were under construction all
World capitals. There there was all: both the Senate, and the Synod, and the ministries. Capital
Should have all it. When in 1918 the government has moved to Moscow,
At that moment, obviously, also there was an idea of the general plan of 1935 which should
Was to adapt Moscow for execution of functions of capital of the country. Fortunately,
It has not occurred. But there will be in this or that kind, anywhere we from it
Let's not get to, because Moscow should have any areas for placing
All that is necessary to capital.
- But Peter did capital not Russian state, and European.
That is why invited English, French, German architects. It
Departed from Russian history. Not whether it is done now and we?
- Let's assume, I will agree with you. But let's assume and another:
Peter Peterburga would not build. What would be further? To guess easy:
Everything, that is constructed on coast of Neva, in this or that kind would appear on
Coast of the Moskva River. Because at Peter in the Russian state was
Another already statehood, its other structure, other authorities.
Something varies in the state, there are necessary attributes of this power
- And the architecture varies too.
- And the third general plan considers the status of Moscow as capitals Russian
Federations?
- And how without it? By the way, every twentieth metre of the Moscow
Territories is in federal submission. Therefore there is a question not
About allocation of territories for development of federal functions, and about reasonable them
Redistribution. For example, many times brought an attention to the question on building
The governmental centre. The first offer which we have made, -
To deduce from the Educational house military academy and to place there
Governmental bodies. Very good offer, because it
The classical, ancient building located on the bank of Moscow, close
The Kremlin. But it will demand certain job because it is necessary
To recreate interiors, to adapt a building under Government job, and
Hence, to spend considerable money. The second offer -
To convert under the governmental centre building Lefortova, which on
To the architecture, lay-out too it is quite suitable for this purpose. Here too
Many money is required, therefore offers are not accepted yet definitively.
- Between the authorities as we see, no conflicts are present, is
Mutual understanding. And here is how the conflict of the architect (and not today looks
Necessarily main) which in own way sees shape of capital: with business,
With the market which is pragmatic, rich, impatient and sees in a city
Exclusively interests?
- Such conflicts are. I have often a sensation, that the business
The people wishing something to build in Moscow, least think of a city,
For them the main thing - the property, the real estate. First architects
Capitals have appeared not ready to an impact and could not constrain it. And today
There are architectural and public councils which accurately define for
Those who wishes to receive sites and to build, that they can, and that cannot
To make. Are thus defined etazhnost, an architectural kind,
Mission of a building.
- Rigid conflicts happen?
- Certainly. An example of such conflict - our relations with the investor,
Which wished to construct a trading building on the Suharevsky area. In the answer
On our restrictions he has told, that will refuse building, for to it
Is unprofitable to put up money in this construction. We have not surrendered. Moscow one
In the afternoon does not come to an end, as well as one investor. We will wait for what
Will agree on our conditions. But to break developed architectural ensemble
Let's not give.
- But we, Muscovites, very often spoil an architectural kind of buildings:
steklim loggias, we put lattices at windows, we separate from the world the iron
dvermi. It does not disturb you?
- Disturbs. People assort main walls without experts
In the apartments, punch niches, passes. Certainly, there is an official
The housing commission which should check all. But process of alterations -
Process hidden, and in apartment to everyone without ceremony you will not enter - it is impossible.
Has put, of course, not so much in people, how much in those projects of houses, which
To them offer. Therefore our problem - to build such houses, that to the person
It was convenient, that it then had not to reconstruct them.
- Today it seems to us main thing - to adapt to those apartments,
Which offer us. To whom they on a pocket who can buy them on
The usual salary?
- To all of us time cite as an example the West: say, here there so
All is thought up, that everyone can buy apartment. It seems to me, a trouble in that,
That when our heads go in other countries to them show only
The best. I happened in many foreign cities. Believe, habitation there most
Different level. That we do today in Moscow, - normal
The European series of housing construction. An another matter, that quality of building
Worse.
In Paris social apartments - same "five-storey apartment blocks", which
To us well-known. And there are also apartments of the raised sizes, magnificent
Apartments. We should realise, that we can not live all equally: at people
The different incomes, different possibilities. Today there is a requirement for the small
Apartments, but for some reason it is a shame to us to admit it, though it so.
If we expose today these small apartments on sale, they will be
To use huge demand. At young men who wish to live
Independently, at boys and little girls who leave boarding schools and
Are compelled to live in communal flats, at those adults who left places
The conclusions and too receive rooms in communal flats, at those people, which on
To any reasons are compelled to get divorced and require moving, at last,
At those people who do not have big money and to live humanly, separately,
They would like.
And thereupon I think here of what: events on August, 17th the past
Year at all their indisputable tragic element have rendered also a certain beneficial influence
On consciousness of Russians: we began to look more really at things, we cease to live
On loan. We should understand obvious, but very uneasy true: the good
The free cannot be.
- Earlier general plans provided building of bakeries, table,
Restaurants, shops. Today it was incurred by the market. And what watch
You?
- There are branches for which we are obliged all to provide. It,
Certainly, first of all social sphere - schools, objects
Public health services and so forth which are paid by the budget. But is and
Other branches. Earlier the greatest headache to us was caused by trade.
I remember, when I worked in an architectural workshop, we carefully
Developed the trade scheme in Moscow, doing calculations of in what street
It is necessary to build trading objects where to lay so-called
Specialised streets.
Now the market itself regulates this process. That is interesting, people
Began to trade in those places what we and took away in due time for
It. On Chamberlain in clothes from hands do not trade, there after reconstruction
Book bazaars have returned. GUM with which we suffered because string-bags
And the Kremlin are incompatible, became nowadays an exhibition of achievements not national
Economy. Unfortunately, we have lost a highlight in Stoleshnikovom - have lost
Second-hand, shop "Tobacco", and a lane became a dead zone.
For this reason now it is necessary to take care, that with occurrence
Exclusive shops on Tver bakeries did not vanish in lanes,
That there were schools, hospitals, polyclinics.
- How the prestige of a trade of the architect has exchanged? He/she is the dear person
Or the expert on parcels at those who has the big money?
- Today position at architects a miscellaneous. Is well earning,
Heavy with orders, able to work well and quickly. Them not so
It is a lot of, and among them many decent people, which never and at anybody not
Will follow the tastes. But is also such which will always try
The customer to humour irrespective of, it corresponds any
To architectural representations or not. There are also such architects, which
Live difficultly, poorly because they do not have orders because they work
Slowly, because, at last, it simply does not carry.
In Moscow to the architect is easier: here and the Union of architects of Russia,
And the Union of the Moscow architects, and the Russian academy of architecture and
Building sciences. Half of Russian architects lives in Moscow. And
Here in difficult cases it is possible to count on support of the professional
Communities. More difficult to our colleagues in small cities, where heads
Administrations at times consider, that the architect is not necessary to them, that they all
Know.
- Whether accept participation in building of capital objects the foreign
Architects?
- In Moscow it is not enough of them. To work in Russia, as, however, and in
To any other country, it is necessary to have the licence, to know the law, norms and rules.
And that will design something the foreign architect, will construct a building, and a fire
In case of what to extinguish it is necessary to domestic firemen. As a rule, job
Foreign experts goes accompanied by our architectural
Collectives.
- You try to do Moscow a city convenient for people. But many
The prospect of the third transport ring disturbs. Especially those who
Lives nearby. What it is necessary!.
- To get the given situation all at first sight it is impossible. But on
The business it is possible if to reduce to a minimum of inconvenience of minority, which
Arise at the account of interests of the majority of citizens. First of all we want
To unload historical city centre choking with overloads. A line
The third transport ring will reduce number of people which can get
In a discomfortable situation. Only four percent of a line will pass in blizi
From habitation.
Thus in Hamovnikah the line will go not from apartment houses,
And it is completely transferred towards Luzniki, for the railway. At the area
Gagarin and on crossing with the Kutuzovsky prospectus the road will pass under
The earth. And from above will construct garages, will break squares. On Autofactory a part
Houses we will settle out, because anything else there you will not think up. So
We think of inhabitants and we care. Our lack - we meet with a little
Muscovites, we explain a little. We, unfortunately, at first lift a wave, and
Then we meet and we explain, that will be and as. It is necessary to do all, of course,
On the contrary.
- When in Moscow there will be civilised parking for motor vehicles?
- The civilised garage costs much, but health is more expensive. In Moscow
Now about two millions motor vehicles, and modern garages it is built
In total on 250 thousand. A trouble that earlier, building inhabited quarters, not
Thought of garages. Now so: we build garage - we forbid "cockleshells" in a zone
This garage. We clear territory, we pass to other site and all
We repeat at first.
- Unless it is fair to pursue owners of garages?
- And unless it is fair, that "cockleshells" put near to apartment houses,
Kindergartens, on heating systems? We will operate with civilised methods,
Not pressing, not offending automobile owners, helping them.
- Whether will increase in capital of hotels?
- Certainly. The building program in Moscow is already developed
"Three-stars" hotels. The first will be constructed on the area Belarus
Station between Wood and Butyrsky streets.
- It is to a city favourably?
- Today it is favourable to maintain only those hotels, which
Have got to system of the international. Therefore "Penta" became "Penta-Renaissance",
And "Balchug" - "Balchug Kempinski". Today many of those who took ground
Sites under building of hotels, ask about building there the inhabited
Houses. But in Moscow it is a lot of visitors that is why hotels are necessary to it. Can
To be, not so expensive, as existing. We need a hotel economy
On 400 thousand numbers, and we have while all 70 thousand.
- What will be with already existing hotels?
- To hotel "Intourist" which belongs to Moscow, we will change etazhnost,
Appearance. The city already searches for partners with which will realise this
The program. There is a program of development of hotel "Moscow" where it is supposed
To create the hotel-public centre with placing of the large
Conference hall. If to speak about hotel "Russia", for it
Reconstruction already are investors who are interested in job but while
It is not known, that they want.
- Where you, as the architect, have led the visitor of capital that have shown
From new building?
- Temple of the Christ of the Savior, bank building on Top Krasnoselsky,
Building "Nautilus" on the Lubjansky area, a "McDonald's" building opposite
The central telegraph, "the New opera" in a garden "Hermitage". And if to children, -
Old-new zoo, Manezhnuju the area.
- What architecture of the Russian city is pleasant to you most of all?
- Pskov if, of course, not to consider Moscow. But in Moscow
I wish to live. And so that in it wished to live and my children.
Victoria MOLODTSOVA.
//* an information Source: the Russian newspaper, 30.03.99
//* Reg. Nom. - 1090300331.41-------------------------------------------
|
