In the building of the State Tretyakov Gallery was an exhibition of the draft plan of the building in CHA and the Tretyakov Gallery.
History of it appears so. In March 2008 the head of Inteko Elena Baturin has exposed in Cannes construction project on the site of this building "Orange" by Norman Foster. This caused an uproar. In April, she met with Vladimir Putin, then president of Russia, and the results he had instructed Prime Minister Viktor Zubkov to work out the issue (in fact, it was instructed to himself, because in May he became prime minister). Was a commission, supervised by Deputy Prime Minister Igor Shuvalov. From Moscow, it includes Vladimir Resin.
Читать дальше...
In July 2008 the Commission decided to study the issue in terms of balancing the interests of three stakeholders - the Tretyakov Gallery, Central House of Artists and the City of Moscow, who owns the playground. By September, the two art organizations formulated their demands for areas in the new complex, and the Moscow city authorities commissioned the Institute of the General Plan to conduct an analysis of the urban development area with a view to its possible development. The results of this study and were submitted within ten days of the public in the hall of the Tretyakov Gallery at the Crimea, and on 24 February to be held a public discussion of the project.
During this time, however, suffered a crisis. Since September, Elena Baturin distanced itself from the project and in this phase, it did not participate. According to the law and should not - the result of urban analysis and technical specifications for designing the Tretyakov Gallery and the CHA must go through investment competition, and only there to define and a company that will do it, and the project. However, at first it was clear what financial resources can have these preparations, and now - no. Project from a business standpoint look relatively risky and against the backdrop of rising market: Transfer of collections of the Tretyakov Gallery - this is terribly expensive action. Amid crisis, it looks hopeless. In addition, Lord Foster closed his architectural practice in Russia and work on the project "Orange" ceased.
Accordingly, the situation looked like this, that, on the one hand, the project is long dead, and the Institute of General Plan should simply be bureaucratic logic, work out instruction Resin "to nowhere." Frankly speaking, the degree of ticky-tacky submitted their draft an argument in favor of such a decision. Therefore, an attempt to campaign against the project when it was exhibited in the Tretyakov Gallery, has not led to serious results. Against bureaucratic phantom made to the Disclaimers, difficult to fight in earnest.
But two things very confused. First, rumors. Unfortunately, none of the responsible people are not willing to say anything about a voice recorder, but from different sides I during these ten days have heard the same story. Namely, that Putin intends to do on-site CHA federal financial center, which is not in Moscow and the lack of which prevents it to become the world's financial capital. In this case, it is not about finding a private investor, they will come running themselves, as they came running to the reconstruction of the palace in Strelna. Perhaps, and Elena Baturina not be able to completely distance himself from the project.
Of course, in this situation can easily be the victim of misinformation that is running the express purpose of discrediting the project. But the second factor, which is confusing - is that, in fact, drawn, and that is presented for public discussion.
The proposed project does not own architecture, urban development is the analysis - that is, the location of buildings and their altitude. However, at this level shows that the CHA and the Tretyakov Gallery is still connected together - and that was one of the main shortcomings of the existing building. It CHA passed closer to the metro "October" and the building of the Tretyakov push to the corner of the site, adjacent to the trestle bridge and the embankment of the Crimea. Today it is the most dull part of the site, there is gas station. All the troubles of the situation saved. Why then rebuild?
In place of CHA is proposed to build a business center height of 17 floors. In this project there is no urban planning logic, no functional analysis, but there is another. Like an excavator, all the territory of the cultural functions are shifted to the edge, closer to the overpass, which usually collect snow. The very ground cleared under the investment function.
Around the new business center of the sponsors of the draft proposes to maintain the park, the remainder of the current fleet of Arts. However, anyone who knows the realities of today's Moscow, understands that such internal park, fenced off from the line of road building and adjacent to the new business center. His enclose a fence, and at the entrances put toptunov. Look at the Government Center near Moscow, Moscow region - where the building is designed around the park, the promenade for walking, beautiful public place. But it is at a distance of kilometers away from the building surrounded by barbed wire and provided with a system checkpoint that can withstand a tank attack. The same will be on the site of the Park of Arts, and is little dependent on the architects. They can not create such spaces, but once created, the checkpoint formed themselves.
The crisis dictates its own laws, and Foster in this space will not be. Apparently, to make this project will be Michael Posokhin (territory assigned to his institution). I am personally not fond of CHA buildings, but we feel the difference. Near projects Michael Posokhin is a masterpiece that should be preserved at all costs.
The most salient feature here is the cynicism. Yet to reach the public with the proposal raking the Tretyakov Gallery and CHA closer to the trestle bridge, which are located Tire and garages, is risky. As well as reaching the residents of the region Yakimanka with the proposal to deprive them park and make it a recreational zone business center. Sam's cynicism about something shows.
There may be two options. Either planners in general have forgotten how to be guided by any logic, other than commercial. We previously had a strong urban planning school, they knew how much, but now for them "to undertake an analysis of urban development" means simply to decide how to mop up the site from residents and tenants under the subsequent sale. Then in front of us a vivid example of falling standards of urban culture, truly landmark. It must be placed in textbooks to show to what can happen with once-decent people.
Or, the project is really worth the disposal of Vladimir Putin, and then it becomes clear that the spit and the Tretyakov Gallery, and the residents. Strange that it is not allowed to strip a riot Park Arts from mothers with prams. Then I do not know what to do. It remains only where it is possible to scream: Hey! Vladimir Vladimirovich! Foster will not be! Will Manege Square in the old Russian plastic parts!
When Lord Foster has proposed his project "Orange", I made a mistake in his defense. I thought that the collection of Russian avant-garde in this building can be a sign for Moscow, that this is indeed the new Tretyakov Gallery. Failed to generally assume that in our culture today, the institution may be more advanced than in the 60's and 70's. The general cultural level had fallen so much that people are not ashamed to speak with projects of this level, when it comes to the main national museum of the country.
The newspaper Kommersant »№ 30 (4085) on 19.02.2009
19.02.2009, 21:05
About the new building of the CHA
Древовидный вид