Funeral Moscow

[Тютчев]

Natalia Kureneva, Brigadier architect, "Mosproekt-2" to them. MV Posokhin:

"We build commercial and municipal facilities. In both cases, the architect has to deal with the customer. We have to take into account his wishes - irrespective of whether it coincides with our opinion. When it comes to municipal facilities on the outskirts of the city, our main problem is that the building is allocated little money. Therefore we are forced to use cheap and not always high quality and beautiful materials, which detracts from the appearance of the building.

When we are talking about building in the center, other problems arise. Customer first, wants to squeeze the maximum usable area and, secondly, often have their own ideas about the architecture of the building. Get the maximum space possible in several ways: increase the number of storeys of the building or to occupy a large portion of land than is necessary under the rules. For example, if in the area permitted altitude mark involves five full floors and a technical floor, and the customer wants to have six floors, the architect is trying to stuff into this mark additional floor: changing contours of the roof, making the top floor attic, although the architecture is for the benefit of not going. Increasing the area under the building on the site, we have, respectively, are losing land to planting. Architect (and dendrologic) and then look for a compromise: the suit roof gardens, provide a vertical greening (creepers on the walls). If this fails to comply with the rules, we do not devote to the manner in which the customer goes out of the situation.

I think that the customer often perceives its object as a private country house rather than building in urban areas. We are trying this for the ability to resist. So, we built a house in Molochny Lane. The customer had their own ideas about how you like some of the windows and stained glass windows, the details of the roof. Yes, we came to a compromise, but to say that we are nothing without sacrifice, I can not. We have changed the contours of the roof, increased the size of window openings. If we were designed independently, we would have done something differently. But we managed to avoid the glazed terrace, which we requested. We wrote a letter to the customer, which tried to explain why this should not be done, and he listened to us.

Another example: to us by inheritance from the brigade architect Firsova moved object in Schetininskom Lane, near Ordynka. According to rumors, Firsov declined to object because the views of the customer and the architect on the architectural facade did not match. This act causes respect. This brings us to yet another, perhaps the most painful for me the theme: what if in the area is a monument of architecture, or you participate in the reconstruction of the monument of architecture. I am very afraid to face the situation where a monument on my site would go for demolition. As an architect, I can not do anything. I will be happy if I could turn it into a new architectural ensemble and enable him to live. But if it is decided that the monument demolished, I would not be able to resist it. As a citizen I can put the signature against the demolition of the building, but as an ordinary architect, I have to work in a situation in which I caused. Unfortunately, now there are many situations where the architect is forced to compromise with yourself.



Rozhdestvenka, 25
Was: the mansion of the XIX century
After: residential building, a renovated turn-key, put up for sale