Red October: Discovery of an island

КРАСНЫЙ ОКТЯБРЬ ОТКРЫТИЕ ОСТРОВА

THE RED OCTOBER DISCOVERY OF AN ISLAND

WORKSHOP 28 MAY - 6 JUNE 2010 MOSCOWBERLAGE INSTITUTE at STRELKA INSTITUTE

КРАСНЫЙ ОКТЯБРЬ ОТКРЫТИЕ ОСТРОВА

THE RED OCTOBER DISCOVERY OF AN ISLAND

WORKSHOP 28 MAY - 6 JUNE 2010 MOSCOWBERLAGE INSTITUTE at STRELKA INSTITUTE

5 Workshop Berlage Institute at Strelka Institute Moscow June 2010

1 ВВЕДЕНИЕ>>INTRODUCTION >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 71.1 Foreword 91.2 Workshop Brief 151.3 Paradigms Of The Luzkhov Era 191.4 The creative city and its future 21

2 ОТКРЫТИЕ ОСТРОВА>>DISCOVERYOFANISLAND >232.1 The Strelka Area 272.2 Chronology of the Site 29

3 ГОЛОСА ОСТРОВА>>VOICESOFTHEISLAND >>>>>> 313.1 Alex Stolyarik, Eugene Glekel 32 3.2 Mikhail Kozyrev 343.3 Stanislav Poshvikin 35

4 КОНКУРС ПЕРВЫХ ИДЕЙ>>VISIONCOMPETITION >394.1 Lifestyle Toolbox 414.2 Green Island 514.3 Creative Bridging 574.4 Inner City 67

5 ПЕТР-I-ПЛАН КЛАУЗУРА>>PETERPLANIMPROMPTU77

6 УЧАСТОК СТРЕЛКИ>>THESTRELKASITE>>>>>>>> 916.1 Urban Context 936.2 The Mystery of an Island 103

7 СТРЕЛКА, ВПЕРЕД!>>FASTFORWARDSTRELKA>>>>>1117.1 Overall Scheme 1137.2 Towards a Mixed Use Program 1237.2 Chocolate Square 1297.3 Strelka Tip 1377.4 East Bank 1457.5 North Side 151

8 РУКОВОДИТЕЛИ>>TUTORS>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>159

StrelkaInstitute

BerlageInstitute

Workshop

The Red October: Discovery of

an Island

Tutors

Vedran Mimica

Thomas Stellmach

Maria S. Giudici

Davide Sacconi

Participants

Daria Bychkova, Olga

Khokhlova, Daria Klochkova,

Alexei Kolesov, Valeria

Krysenko, Alina Kvirkveliya,

Marko Mihic-Jeftic, Ana

Leshchinsky, Eric Oskey,

Tatyana Pissareva, Pavel Rueda,

Anna Shevchenko, Alexandra

Skitiova, Gleb Vitkov, Alexander

Zaltsman.

Moscow June2010

Thanksto:

Ilya Oskolkov-Tsentsiper

Varvara Melnikova

Katya Girshina

Sergey Golikov

Alina Makovetskaya

berlageinstitute

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTIONВВЕДЕНИЕ

>>

8 Workshop Berlage Institute at Strelka Institute Moscow June 2010 9 Workshop Berlage Institute at Strelka Institute Moscow June 2010

Вступление - Илья Осколков-ЦенциперForeword—IlyaOskolkov-Tsentsiper

The idea to create an institution like Strelka first hit us in the summer of 2009, when we realized that Moscow cannot go on any longer in the same primitive state of understanding of architecture, urbanism and design that it has been stuck in over the last few decades. We wanted to create a place where the most promising specialists from Russia and abroad could collaborate with the most brilliant architects, urban theorists and intellectuals. It was essential for us to be able to offer an education at Strelka free of tuition charges, which is critical for a country as uneven as Russia.

We were fortunate to find a genuine ally in Rem Koolhaas and OMA/AMO, who took over the task of developing the curriculum and inviting esteemed mentors to participate in the program. Our correspondence and communication throughout this process has been in and of itself an education for me and my colleagues.

At the very start of our quest for other collaborators in Europe, we were introduced to the Berlage Institute, which has been another invaluable experience. The dean of the institute, Vedran Mimica, has demonstrated an unwavering generosity in his willingness to share his craft: the art of producing true knowledge in a postgraduate education and of leading a school grounded in research. It is thus no accident that when we inaugurated our facilities with a celebratory debut of “Summer at Strelka,” our program of public events, we invited the Berlage Institute as our first guests. They conducted a workshop for Russian students on the topic of developing creative spaces within the territories of former industrial zones.

The case study for this research was the potential future mixed-use complex at Red October - the site of Strelka. Red October is a unique ensemble of red-brick factory buildings from the 19th century, positioned directly opposite the Kremlin. Right now it is host to what are unquestionably the most interesting bars, galleries, and studios in Moscow. The complex offers itself as a type of utopian commune; this feeling is only

IlyaOskolkov-TsentsiperisthePresidentofStrelkaInstituteforMedia,ArchitectureandDesign.

amplified by the fact that those who work or frequent the place understand that this idyll is for a limited time, for clear economic and political reasons.

The results of our research now stand before you, as the Strelka Institute for Media, Architecture and Design.


Вступление - Ведран МимицаForeword—VedranMimica

The Berlage Institute’s collaboration with the Strelka Institute began when we agreed to design a workshop brief for the strategic development of the former Red October Chocolate Factory site, situated on an island in the middle of Moscow. We organized the master class around some of the primary operational principles of the Berlage Institute, principally that every studio should have involved in its production all of the stakeholders. So it was important and interesting to see the presence of the Guta Group developer, Russian intelligentsia, the Strelka staff, and the interested public together in the debate for the development of the cultural cluster. By embracing reality, we tried to advance an alternative or, perhaps, advanced model of planning.

In this district, the developers wanted to introduce various creative practices into the former factory and create a cultural cluster in the city center of Moscow. At the moment, the development of this super luxurious neighborhood had been frozen to some extent for five years. We embarked on the premise that such projects or processes in other world cities have frequently brought so-called “pioneers” onsite. The result has been that the pioneers leave after certain time and gentrifiers, with financial support from developers, would create enclaves of monofunctionality and monoculture. The task of redirecting seemingly inevitable process of gentrification was our immediate aspiration. We hoped to facilitate the possibility of developing the island into a mix of housing and creative industry facilities. Our brief anticipated that creativity is crucial to the economic development of the contemporary city. And so we ask if one can imagine places that foster creativity rather than simply offering facilities that would be driven by a kind of normative masterplanning common in city building. In other words, we asked if it is possible to construct environments or milieus that can host creativity without forcing it, without top-down, bureaucratic decision-making. We believe that precisely in the city of Moscow, with its incredible potential for development, perhaps such hybrid conditions and an exchange of different ways to develop the city could hypothetically be possible. That was our hypothesis.

VedranMimicaisDirectoroftheBerlageInstituteandresponsibleforcomposingandimplementingitsresearchprogram.

The workshop was offered to young designers, architects, and journalists. We worked with seventeen incredibly intelligent, dedicated, and creative people in an almost 24-hour-a-day schedule for nine intense days. From the very first day, there was an extreme level of understanding the brief’s conceptual frame and a certain commitment that demonstrated not only adept design skills but also a high level of critical thinking. The workshop was incredibly positive for us, and after this experience we believe that the creation of the Strelka Institute for architecture and design will produce excellent architects and planners. The Strelka workshop showed us that there is already a group of incredibly eager, young, and talented practitioners in Russia who are seeking different models of development to the prevailing norms. In our exchange, we simply tried to frame the ways in which they could advance their arguments.

This publication should perhaps be seen as an argument not only the development of Strelka Island but also for the development of urban culture in the whole city of Moscow. Dynamic and different cultures, in a kind of pixelized way, are already fermenting and have been achieved in the studios, courtyard, and bar at Strelka. We believe that Strelka or perhaps the whole Red Chocolate Factory cultural cluster should be a sort of antenna that radiates its statements, messages, and designs to the whole of Moscow and to all of Russia.

The advanced model of urban planning advocated in our workshop with Strelka anticipates and supports the importance of different stakeholders and the role they perform in the urban territory. The cultural cluster of the island should be permanently open and thereby connect these stakeholders, working as a place of osmosis and exchange, rather than some mode of gated community. After this experience, the Berlage Institute would really like to continue our relation with the Strelka Institute because we believe in the very near future that the two institutes could acquire an even more productive and meaningful association.

14 15 Workshop Berlage Institute at Strelka Institute Moscow June 2010Workshop Berlage Institute - Strelka Institute Moscow June 2010

establish new examples of city making practices as well. Tackling the Red October project means necessarily discussing the possibility for such complexes to become performing environments and enhance the existing conditions of their surroundings. What is it, then, that will make the Red October transformation successful? What should the Red October offer to Moscow, and what kind of urbanity could it propose?Ultimately, the issue of the transformation of places such as the Red October is not as simple as it may seem: creativity represents today a key asset for the economic development of cities that revolve increasingly on knowledge-based activities. 2.CreativityandthecityIn a post-industrial condition, research and innovation become the basis for the economy of the city. No longer confined to the realm of the superfluous, creativity becomes the prerequisite for the development of such an economy. Exchange of ideas and multidisciplinarity cease to be the mantras of academia and intellectual élite to become vital components of a diffused process of production of knowledge. Initiatives such as the Red October transformation can offer the ideal opportunity to generate the

1.RedOctober:fromindustrialproductiontocreativeindustryThe Red October area on Bolotny Island, Moscow, has undergone in the last few years a radical transformation from confectionery factory to mixed use complex that aims at becoming a hub for new activities. In European cities, industrial production has been replaced by production of knowledge, and the case of Red October stands as paradigmatic example of a contemporary urban condition; the ambition to turn the former factory into a hotspot for creativity should therefore offer the chance to cast a critical glance on the idea of cultural production and its relationship with the city at large. In the last decades a large number of industrial complexes have been redeveloped as centres of creative production, mainly as a strategy to protect their architectural heritage; but the social and urban implications of this dynamic have often been neglected, shadowed as they are by smaller scale issues of preservation and reuse. And yet, the resemantisation of productive plants into places where knowledge is created and exchanged is a crucial transition point for our cities. Far from being mere real estate investments, these operations have the potential to trigger larger scale processes and

Задание воркшопаWorkshopBrief


or perhaps new spatial models should emerge. We should therefore rethink which features can turn a complex as the Red October into an attractor for creative practices: in short, what would turn Red October into a new centre for the city.

3.SpacesofurbanintensityBoth sides of the Iron Curtain, the factory had a symbolic presence in the city of the twentieth century; it represented the belief in the progress of industrial society. Nowadays, as production is more and more an abstract matter and our conceptual references are increasingly rarefied, it is easy to see the abandoned plants as romantic ruins, remains of the lost ‘identity’ of cities that are now undergoing major transformations. This identity has never really been linked to specific places, as the architecture of factories is largely international and generic in its character, but it was indeed related to the common recognition of the meaning, utility and purpose of industries from both an economical and social point of view. Contemporary creative industry, on the contrary, seems a very volatile idea and struggles to be recognized, understood and represented. Starting from this core question, the possibility of generating an urban centre around a hub for cultural production seems an extremely challenging one, as it touches at several levels the key issues of the city of today. Working on scenarios for

the Red October means then to rethink what makes such a hub attractive, and imagining what could both private and public players do to enhance the development of this hub. The redevelopment of former industrial areas is often the excuse for large-scale real estate operations that offer very little to the city other than an increase in the land value of the newly gentrified area. But the Red October ambition is to establish a mixed use centre that would encourage the growth of creative industry, an ambition that has to be explored and supported with new ideas and strategies, as inserting new centres in an existing constellation is not a neutral act, or an easy one. The workshop will therefore try to understand what qualities should a new centrality have to become an engine for creative activities. The scenarios for the Red October will explore what kind of relationship we could establish between flexibility and sense of place, living and working spaces, production and creativity, individual initiatives and general frameworks, public policies and private investments. What is it that triggers creativity in a certain environment, and what is it that triggers urban intensity in specific places in the city? The question is perhaps undecidable, but it might very well open up a new field of possibilities for Red October, Moscow and the post-industrial city itself.

conditions for this kind of performance; but how is it possible to foster a creative growth, as the concept of creativity itself seems to be so elusive? And, indeed, is it possible at all to guide or even encourage the development of a so-called creative industry?The post-industrial city is at the same time a factory, a school, a research centre; as activities mix and overlap the rhetoric of total spatial flexibility substitutes the traditional zoning of the age of industry. The myth of fluidity seems to suggest that any kind of control would only hamper the ‘natural’ development of life processes, and, therefore, of creativity as well. What kind of places can we then imagine for a working condition that has continuous change as its hallmark?Cities struggle to come up with suitable responses to this situation, as production of knowledge is alternatively labelled as either a corporate affair or a grassroots dynamic; but the case of Red October investigates the possibility to establish places where cultural exchange is hosted without necessarily being controlled. These places are crucial in the economic structure of a society based on ‘immaterial labour’ that produces services rather than goods. The development of such experiments can be considered a test project for modes of life and work that will eventually become the standards of the city of the next decades. Perhaps new policies are needed in order for these experiments to succeed,


Парадигма эпохи ЛужковаParadigmsoftheLuzhkovEra

business. But as the request for office space was gradually absorbed, the need for housing became towards the late 1990s the most powerful engine of the construction industry.This shift in urban politics was influenced by the demographic growth of the city. After a long phase of shrinking, Moscow started to grow again around 1997; from the 8.5 million inhabitants of that year, it reached the current figure of 10.4 million around 2004.The growth is largely due to internal immigration and it fuels a real estate sector that is already booming thanks to the improved economical conditions of the long-term residents. In the previous version of the Genplan, by 2020 42% of the area of Moscow would be used in a different capacity- that is to say, density will increase everywhere in the city. Nowhere is this condition more visible, than in the case of the former industrial areas that await reconversion. Beside Luzhkov, two key characters are able to influence the general policies about such areas: Alexander Kuzmin, Chief Architect since 1996, and the head of Mosproject 2 Mikhail Posokhin. Mosproject, the former state design office, is still the biggest reality in terms of architectural development in the city. Commercial developers thus deal with a complex administrative situation in which their projects have to fit within the larger canvas of the latest Genplan; in turn, the Genplan is shaped by the pressure of the need for new housing, and the political pressure to strengthen the preeminence of Moscow. As the Genplan is a regulative tool, and not a prescriptive one, the direct relationship between investors and politicians is crucial; the plan thus becomes an object of negotiation and discussion rather than the embodiment of a clear intention.

In early may 2010, a third version of the Genplan, or General Plan for Moscow, was approved. The Genplan tries to sketch the direction of the city development up to year 2025 and embodies the policies of the city administration led by Mayor Yuri Luzhkov. Many criticisms have arisen regarding this plan, mostly on an infrastructural point of view.Traffic in Moscow has steadily increased since the early 1990s, and citizens perceive the Genplan as a weak solution for this pressing problem. Moreover, the previous versions of the Genplan allowed the substitution of mid-XX century housing complexes with new, taller buildings that achieve higher densities, further complicating the circulation in the city centre. These choices correspond to a precise strategy aimed at the strengthening of the character of Moscow as head of the Commonwealth of Independent States. As the ties between the former Soviet Republics become more and more loose, the capital needs to reinforce its role in a changing and uncertain geopolitical situation. It comes as no surprise, in such a larger scale scenario, that the city administration focused its efforts in encouraging the real estate sector, densifiying the consolidated centre and expanding through new residential neighborhoods. But after twenty years, new infrastructural policies are needed in order to solve a circulation system that fails to support the need of the population.This condition of hypertrophic real estate development unparalleled by infrastructural growth can be considered the hallmark of the last decades. On the political point of view, this period has been dominated by Yuri Luzhkov, mayor of the city since 1992. During the first years he was in office, Luzhkov believed that the centre of Moscow should develop mostly as a centre of trade, services and


“Creative City”и его будущееTheCreativeCityanditsFuture

critical voices such as David Harvey and Matteo Pasquinelli have pointed out that the creatives often play the part of the bait in complex real estate operations that ultimately aim at the substitution of the creative ‘pioneers’ with bourgeois ‘gentrifiers’. This process is generally described precisely as gentrification: the original inhabitants are pushed out in order to make space for target clients that buy housing units at expensive prices. Gentrification takes place in derelict areas that offer some key asset (position, identity of old industrial structures) but are poorly served and thus perceived as unsafe. Usually, the creatives are the first layer of society that is attracted by such places because of the reasons we already discussed –good economic conditions for large spaces. Nevertheless, their joy is short lived, as they are usually forced to move out when the prices stop to be affordable. In the meantime, they will have served their purpose: by establishing their practices on site, they create a sense of trust, the impression that the neighborhood is lively, young, and on its way to something better.As we have seen, in the Strelka area the informal art initiatives have played precisely such a part. How long will they be able to resist in a territory that is bound to become one of the most expensive locations in Moscow?It is then necessary to reconsider what is the future of these initiatives and whether we could imagine spatial strategies able to keep some pioneers in the area even after it has achieved its goal as real estate operation. If it is really true that knowledge creates economy, it might prove more beneficial to actually encourage some creatives to stay in the area, rather than only seeing the short term profit derived from substituting their studios with high-end housing.

Recent theory has established the creative city as paradigm of the post-industrial urban reality. Today, the production of knowledge has become as important as the production of goods. Therefore, all activities linked to research and development, communication, and innovation take the foreground in the economic development of contemporary cities. Cities, so to speak, cannot afford not to be creative –or else, they will lose the race to more competitive, more creative cities. Authors such as Richard Florida argue that such a performance can only be fostered by truly diverse, vibrant urban environments. Through quantitative analysis, Florida demonstrates that neighborhoods that host more artists, more gay people, more citizens of different ethnic background, do ultimately perform better on an economic point of view. Plainly said, there is business in the production of knowledge, and a contemporary urban centre should encourage social mixity in order to maximize the generation of original ideas that can eventually bring revenue to the city itself.Nevertheless, cases such as the Strelka area raise the question of how to encourage and maintain a vibrant urban environment in an unstable economic reality such as the one of today. The traditional industrial production has left the place, and art and intellectual production tentatively colonize the existing premises. Design institutes, TV studios, art practices have moved to Strelka thanks to the relatively affordable rent, large spaces and prime position. It is easy to see how the lack of efficient infrastructural connections has contributed to keeping the rent prices low. As this condition improves, the value of the land increases, eventually pushing out the so-called creative class. In fact, this dynamic is not at all unheard of;

DISCOVERYOFANISLANDОТКРЫТИЕ ОСТРОВА

>>


Территория СтрелкиTheStrelkaArea

The area, which by now had been dubbed as the “Golden Island” in virtue of its development potential continued to be ina state of uncertainty due to the 2008 financial crisis and unanswered questions on the role of the site within the urban context, phasing and program.Strelka has become the focal point of interest of various actors, among them the public administration. The goals of the development company and the administration do not always coincide. In September 2009, Chief Architect Alexander Kuzmin said: ‘This zone should rather be public. There will be practically no offices on Bolotny Island. There will be hotels, apartments there. A financial center? Definitely no. It’s impossible to have it there, the transportation system doesn’t allow it. Imagine thousand of cars in the rush hours. We have already issued the necessary papers which forbid the construction of office centres in the city centre’1. This take on the matter has been criticized by representatives of the Corporation of Territory Developers, but there seems to be a general agreement that Strelka shall become a residential neighborhood.Public Opinion does not agree. The area is perceived as very central and as such as a place that holds an identity that needs to be public, accessible, preserved and strengthened. The opening of creative practices such as the Strelka Institute brings forward many questions about the potential of the area:

CanStrelkabemorethananotherhousingproject?CanitbepublicandcompetewithParisIledelaCiteorLondon’sModernTateArea?WillimprovedaccessibilityweakenStrelka’sidentity?CantheCreativeIndustrieshelptodevelopasustainableprogramwiththiscomplexsituation?

1 http://www.gzt.ru/topnews/realty/262244.htm

We are not the first who think about the Strelka area, which occupies Bolotny Island from the western tip (‘Strelka’) to the Bolshoi Moskvoretsky bridge. The area can potentially become a prime real estate development, at the same time it is a sensitive spot in Moscow due to its strategic position in the centre of the city.

Since 2002, various investors have been involved in the conversion of the former industrial area.Throughout the last decade different proposals have been presented, but no coherent plan was ever adopted. Up to 2009 most industrial buildings were still in function, among them the historical Red October candy factory, a landmark of the Moskva river scenography. Recently art studios and independent creative practices have colonized the spaces that became available after 2009. This condition is generally interpreted as a transition phase — a state of hibernation until commercial proposals take off at last. From 2003 to 2005 KRT-Megapolis - a subsidiary of the Corporation of Territory Developers managed the property. These two years were too short to reach an agreement between the agendas of all stakeholders, and to the dismay of Mayor Luzhkov no conclusions were reached. As the city is a major stakeholder in this operation, Luzhkov decided to change the management company.From 2005 to 2007 developer Moskapstroi (principal city construction company since 1967) was responsible for the development of the site. Moskapstroi mostly worked at an infrastructural level, providing lighting on the Patriarshy Bridge and improving public space in limited areas.Since 2007, the responsibility passed to Guta Group. The Group had been involved in the project from the beginning, but only took the lead after the previous attempts failed to kickstart the development.


Хронология участкаChronologyoftheSite

2002....................................... The Russian company Guta-group acquires the chocolate factory “Red October” and the territory around it. 25% of the shares go to the Moscow City Government.

2003....................................... Guta-group and the Moscow City Government announce the start of an elite development project called “Golden Island”. The project is aimed at the construction of high-end housing on Balchug Island.

October, 2004 ....................... no development has started yet. Some local artists rent abandoned factory garages from Guta-group and establish the artistic community “Art-Strelka”.

End of 2004 ........................... Moscow authorities launch a programme aimed at removing industries from the city centre. The “Red October” stops being productive and its activities are moved to other premises. Meanwhile, Guta-group finances a new pedestrian bridge that connects the Island and the Cathedral of Christ the Saviour.

2005....................................... The empty spaces of the former factory “Red October” are offered for rent at high prices in an attempt to re-brand the Strelka area as “Golden Island”. The first leased property is converted into an elite night club called “Paradise”.

May, 2008.............................. For the first time the former factory hosts events such as exhibitions of contemporary art and the presentation of the glossy magazine “Black Square”.

August, 2008 ......................... The economic crisis slows the construction industry; Guta-group freezes the “Golden Island” project.

September 2008 .................... The chocolate shop of “Red October” factory hosts an international exhibition of modern art organized in collaboration with New York gallerist Larry Gagosian.

November, 2008 ................... Guta-group lowers rent prices to $250-450 for a square meter per year. Heiress Maria Baibakova rents 3000 square meters and engages in a series of expensive artistic projects, inviting renowned protagonists of the London art scene to Moscow. After a year Baibakova decides to end the experiment.

May, 2009.............................. “Art-Strelka”, which paid a symbolic rent of $150 per year, is pressed to move out. Guta-group plans to open a restaurant in the former garages of the factory, but Russian entrepreneur Alexander Mamut rents the space and establishes the Strelka Institute for architecture, media, and design. The Strelka Institutes ideally continues the legacy of the “Art-Strelka” artistic community.

September, 2009 ................... The shops of the former “Red October” factory are used as one of the main exhibition spaces of the Third Moscow Biennal.

2009—2010 ......................... More than 60 leasers have moved into the former factory renovating the premises at their own expense. Among the current leasers are restaurants, cafes, ateliers, photo-studios, art galleries and services such as gyms and beauty salons.

VOICESOFTHEISLANDГОЛОСА ОСТРОВА

>>


Интервью: Алекс Столярик,Евгений ГлекельInterview:AlexStolyarik,EugeneGlekel

AS There are definitely some restrictions. There is a zoning, a definite land use. There are clear restrictions in terms of height, insulation, infrastructural issues. Not all of them fit to the economy of the project. And developers are always looking for a better economic performance. But each developer stands for himself. Developers are not city planners. They look at their properties and think: “How I can make the most out of this?” And they start pushing the limits with the city administration. And if you are well connected, if you have good relationship with the city administration, it can help with the change of zoning. Sometimes.

EG What creates good relationships? If you grew up together, if you were together at school, if you go to the sauna together.

AS It’s a tricky question, what creates good relationship. I mean, you’ve got to do good work, create more jobs, and do whatever is good for the economy of this city. Any construction is good if it relates correctly with the infrastructure of the city. In these cases the city helps you with the development. The more you invest in the city the more you get from the city. That’s actually one way to go about it. There is a masterplan for Moscow. It’s difficult to change it but dealing with issues area by area is reasonable I think. It’s like a give and take game.

AS Public space doesn’t bring money. Unless there is a reason to make a public space for a business centre or a residential area, in which case it will bring money.

EG There are very strict regulations about public spaces and green areas in particular.

AS Basically the most profitable kind of development at the moment is the residential sector. Lofts in particular. There is already an overabundance of office space in the city. You cannot convert the existing factory into residential space without legally changing its zoning, but there is a trick to overcome this obstacle. And the trick is that you do not change the intended use, you just call the development ‘apartments’ and convert it into residential lofts without really changing its formal use. Lofts are not that popular yet in Moscow, but I think the future is in this kind of conversions. There is a huge market for residential space and lofts. Another profitable typology is the hotel. It’s very similar to residential. You can easily convert a factory into hotels. If former factories are located near the metro or close to a good area where there are interesting urban hot spots and that sorts of things, then a conversion can be really successful.

Mixed use… It definitely works. For the transformation of a former industrial area I would definitely choose a mixed use development. If you only do offices, they are empty at night. Actually, they are empty after 7 in the evening, which is not good for the development. For the economic performance of the area, it is better if people are present at night. They can go to a café, they can go to a theatre.

There are definitely a lot of new developments during the latest years. New projects.

EG There has been an intense construction activity outside the city. The city has expanded a lot. Suburbs have grown a lot.

Howdoesthepublicadministrationinfluencethedecisionsofdevelopers?

Whatcontributestocreatinggoodrelationships?

Aredevelopersencouragedtoprovidepublicspaceforthecity?

WhatkindofprogramsellsbestinthismomentinMoscow?

Whatdoyouthinkaboutmixedusedevelopments?

HowdidMoscowchangeinthelast10years?

AlexStolyarikistheGeneralManagerof“AFIRus”,themanagingcompanyof“AFIDevelopment”

EugeneGlekelistheDirectorof“GroupSystemsArchitects”

The discussion with Stolyarik and Glekel shed light on the relationship between developers and city authorities. When it comes to large-scale interventions, negotiation between private and public interests is a key factor. The so-called Genplan (masterplan of Moscow) offers a canvas for this negotiation rather than acting as projective tool. In such a condition, architects should do more than simply designing good environments: they have to first construct a grammar to communicate with the clients. Finding a common ground between the economic performance and a need for improved urban conditions becomes then the prerequisite for any architectural project. Nevertheless, the interview also underlines how sometimes social and economic reasons can dovetail, supporting mixed use developments and conversion of industrial areas.


Интервью: Михаил КозыревInterview:MikhailKozyrev

Everybody in this country knows the chocolate factory “Red October”. People often ask me “Does it still smell of chocolate in your office?”, because this smell was really a legend, you could smell it everywhere around the factory when it functioned. Today, it doesn’t smell. But when we came here last autumn there were still puddles of chocolate on the floor. Then more and more renters began to come in. And now every week I see new people putting on new plates of cafes, design studios, photo studios and so on. It’s a real boom.

I would like if there will be a small hotel here. I think people who work here would also like to live here.

I think that improving the car accessibility would not help, because as soon as you drive out of the island you get stuck in the traffic anyway. If you want to travel home comfortably you should not leave the place until 3.00 a.m.

The construction of a bridge near the monument of Peter the Great would change our life for the better. If more people will visit the area, the better the area will perform. And business follows people. The entrepreneurs who look for space to settle will surely be attracted to the area if they see that it is lively and vibrant.

I don’t know how many of the people who work today in the “Red October” like chocolate but I think everybody should eat 5 chocolates a day to save the local chocolate shop from bankruptcy. As you might know, the local factory shop is still open although the productive activities have been transferred to another place. Moreover, if each of us eats 5 chocolates a day we’ll be happy, and the Balchug Island will be an Island of Happiness.

MikahilKozyrevisashowmanandworksforRainTV,achannelthatbroadcastslivefromtheRedOctober.

To my point of view it is not correct to call the future high-end development just accommodation. Lofts on “Red October” will not be the main residence of their owners; I see them rather as collector pieces belonging to people who also own apartments in London, on Cyprus, anywhere you can imagine. So by building those lofts the developer Anton Kuznetsov of Guta-group will realize his dream to create art objects; ultimately, this operation will support other art projects on the island.

I do not see the construction of a new pedestrian bridge near the monument as a problem. The visitors who will come to the island will not disturb the residents. Everything depends on how the movement along the embankment is handled. We proposed to the Mayor to rebuild the embankment in order to reestablish a contact with the water and provide a pedestrian quay. It would not be too expensive to do that. I believe it is a good idea and the City Government should support it. This reconstruction could also support Mayor Luzhkov’s idea of an “Art Path” which will extend from the Museum of Modern Art on Krimsky Val to the Balchug-Kempinsky Hotel. If we think about city islands such as the ones in the River Seine, we can see that they are lively environments not because of what happens in or around the buildings that stand along the banks, but due to the embankments. All sorts of people spend time there: students, artists, middle class workers, vagabonds, owners of vessels, sailors. Nevertheless, I also think that there should be a path dedicated to residents within the island itself. In that case, the residents could use sheltered routs that would be independent from the fluxes of external visitors.

It will be interesting if every new resident brings in his or her own designer. Then we will have a mosaic of façade decorations which will reveal the characters of the owners.

StanislavPoshvikinisanarchitectofStudio8of“Mosproekt-2”andtheauthortheMasterplanforthedevelopmentoftheterritoryofRedOctoberfactory.

Интервью: Станислав ПошвыкинInterview:StanislavPoshvikin

Whatisspecialaboutthisisland?

Whatkindoffacilitydoyouthinkismissing?Doyouthinkaneasiercaraccessibilitywouldimprovethearea?WhatifabridgenexttoPetertheGreat’sstatuewouldopenupStrelkatomorepedestrianvisitors?

Doyouthinktheidentityoftheformerchocolatefactorycanstillcontributetothecharacteroftheplace?

Doyoubelievetheareaisgoingtobemerelymarket-drivenresidentialaccommodation?

WhatifabridgenexttoPetertheGreat’sstatuewouldopenupStrelkatomorepedestrianvisitors?

Doyouenvisionthedevelopmentasoneensemble,orasacollectionofarchitecturalobjects?


Artistodaythekeyidentityfactorofthearea.Doyoubelieveartistswillbepushedoutiftherealestatedevelopmentsucceeds?HowdoyouimaginetheStrelkaareain10,20,50years?

Artistic life on “Red October”, low rent prices for artists, are a spontaneous marketing trick which nobody designed. That’s a paradox. The only reason art life exists here is that the owners of this territory are young sociable people. I mean Aleksandr Mamut, Anton Chernov and Artyom Kuznetsov. They are not art people but they are open-minded and easy-going and are not going to let such an area in the centre of Moscow become lifeless.

Nobody knows what will happen on “Red October” in 10, 20, 50 years. Luzhkov can come here someday, look at the site from the bridge and say: “What a dump is this? Demolish all!”. And the next day bulldozers will be here. But I want to live until I see a reconstructed embankment where people will walk, kiss, put their feet in the water, even if I don’t think that living on the island will be affordable to most of them.

Stanislav Poshvikin is possibly the person who knows best the Red October complex; he worked on the area for more than a decade and is currently responsible for the architectural project that Guta-group will implement.Two main issues were brought to our interest after talking to him: first of all, the importance of the developers’ role, and secondly, the potential of the open air public space along the quays. As Poshvikin works with Guta-group, he has a clear vision of what kind of commercial operation will be carried on the island. It is going to be a high-end residential development targeted at wealthy clients. But if the market-driven choices are adamantly geared at an elite subject, Poshvikin points out that the shared public spaces should be open and attractive for visitors of every kind. He believes that a careful reconstruction of the embankments would be a key element in providing a vibrant environment. Indeed, it becomes clear that investing in the common spaces can become the most effective tool to preserve a certain degree of publicness on the island.

VISIONCOMPETITIONКОНКУРС ПЕРВЫХ ИДЕЙ

>>

Team1>>Мозаика жизненного пространства

Team1>>LifestyleToolbox

CARS AND PEDESTRIAN ACCESS TRAMBOAT

DISCOVERING AN ISLAND

CITY ROLE


River Transport System

The Island as City Hub

Metro Transport System Tram Transport SystemCar and Pedestrian Accessibility

Lifestyles: Global, Local, Discovery Section: Public and Private Space Relationships




Team2>>Зеленый остров

Team2>>GreenIsland


Accessibility Flows

Building Mass Studies

Flows and Heritage Buildings Section Scheme: Program and Accessibility

Flows and Public Ground Landscape Section


Living Space

Working Space

Public Space

Team3>>Креативное соединение

Team3>>CreativeBridging

CREATIVECLUSTER

CREATIVECLUSTER

CREATIVECLUSTER

CREATIVECLUSTER

CREATIVECLUSTER


Digging

Elevating

Adding

Bridging

Existing Footprint


Toolbox

Mass Studies: Old and New Buildings

Masterplan


Commercial

Working

Education

Housing

Leisure

Overview

CREATIVECLUSTER

RESIDENTS

VISITORS

WORKERS

OWNERS

CITIZENSTOURISTS

STUDENTS

STUDENTS

FREE - LANCERSSTUFF

FREE - LANCERS

CREATIVECLUSTER

CREATIVECLUSTER

HOUSING

COMMERCIAL

EDUCATION

CO - WORKING

LEISURE

RESIDENTS VISITORS WORKERS

CREATIVECLUSTER64 Workshop Berlage Institute at Strelka Institute Moscow June 2010 65 Workshop Berlage Institute at Strelka Institute Moscow June 2010

Users Flows

Program

Team4>>Внутренний город

Team4>>InnerCity


But a TangleNot a Stack...Not a Set...


Programmatic Areas Pixel Programme


Public

Structure, Landscape and Chocolate Factory

Housing

Creative

PETERPLANIMPROMPTUПЕТР-I-ПЛАН КЛАУЗУРА

>>


Monolithic PeterMarko Mihic-Jeftic>> Winning project


Red WedgeAlexei KolesovHonourable mention

Peter ArtFestivalOlga KhokhlovaHonourable mention


Globbing PeterAlexander Zaltsman

Sinking PeterAlina KvirkvelyiaHonourable mention


Mirror PeterAlexandra Skitiova

Christmas Pevtree

Daria Klochkova


Invite BernaskoniGleb Vitkov

Peter RocketValeria Krysenko


Goodbye PeterPavel Rueda

Peter-go-roundAnna Shevchenko

THESTRELKASITE СТРЕЛКА

>>

>>Контекст города

>>UrbanContext


Москва 2025Moscow2025

MoscowTodayМосква сегодня


The Project Area and Major Green Areas in Moscow’s Centre.

The Project Area is embedded within Moscow’s most prominent public spaces.

Контекст городаUrbanContext


The Network of Radial and Concentric Roads is disrupted at it’s very core, Bolotny Island. The site is central and remote at once.

Car Access to the site is characterised by cul-de-sac’s and one-way-streets. Only the initiated can access Bolotny Island.


While several Metro Lines cross the island, there is no actual stop on Bolotny Island. A potential extension of the yellow line might change that.

Two Bus lines access the Island, distances to the stations are generally too large.

>>Загадка острова

>>TheMysteryofanIsland


FASTFORWARDSTRELKA >>

СТРЕЛКА, ВПЕРЕД! >>

>>

>>Общая схема

>>OverallScheme


The general masterplan for the Strelka island is divided in four different areas each one with a different mix of functions and a different lifestyle.

Public Transport Access

The footprint plan of the project shows the relationship between the new development and the city, and the open relationship with the water.


The general masterplan has been conceived to be realized in five phases of development.

The general plan shows how the project is conceived as one coherent development but with different environments defined by a unique relationship between buildings and public spaces.


The entire area has been conceived as mainly pedestrian, with a restricted accessibility for delivery services, safety vehicles, public transportation and residents with permission.

Section: programs and circulation

The private car accessibility is possible through a system of underground parking that will fully cover the parking requirements for residents and visitors.


The diagram shows the accessibility system with the articulated system of pedestrian paths and squares, starting from the main bridge toward the tip of the island and the north side.

Section: pedestrian circulation

All the different areas of the island are equally supplied with green spaces, with a predominance of green in the residential waterfront along the east bank.

В направлении к программе смешанного использованияTowardsaMixedUseProgram

5 966

22 581

24347

1197641 763

30 104

education

culture

creative studios & offices

work/life

residential

retail & leisure

Above: Projected Buildings. Below: Overall Surfaces by Program in Square Metres.


Commercial

Working

Creativity

Residential

Managed Apartments & Hotels

Overview


While the distribution of the program avoids any strict zoning, functions are clustered according to existing building substance, orientation and accessibility. The soft clustering of the functions activate them and create a lively mix in the public spaces which connect them.

>>Шоколадная площадь

>>ChocolateSquare

729070398135960396910743039

site area 13.726 m²footprint 4.834 m²built surface 24.216 m²FAR 1,76

residential surface 15.174 m²nuber of apartments 150residents 337parking places 405

programretail

cafe and restaurants

creative studios

kindergarden

residential apartaments

rsidential penthouses

parking

8889 628 1692 3726 8724 1351410023

programsite area 13.550 m²footprint 9.083 m²built surface 33.682 m²FAR 2,49


retail

clubs


creative studios

residential penthauses

working/living

parking

3092 666 1114 7772 7984 75601953 903



programretail

fitness

clubs


residential penthouses

working/living

technical services

parking

galleries

creative studios

residential apartments

3092 1053 706 351 1264 2159 3602



programretail


parking

yacht club

creative studios

clubs


ChocolateSquare


The Chocolate Square is the area that connects the Patriarshy bridge and the Strelka Institute buildings with the old Chocolate Factory. The area is characterized by a system of small and medium squares and skywalks that will connect the level of the pedestrian bridge with the level of the island. This area, directly connected with the new planned metro station, is the hart of the neighborhood and is conceived to be one the most dynamic in the development.

Therefore most of the space dedicated to working and living lofts, creative studios and retail. The main square is opened in front of the main building of the old factory, connecting the public space with the new west riverfront and highlighting the unique architectonic features of the red industrial volume.In the last two levels of the new buildings are hosted a series of luxurious penthouses that can enjoy the amazing view of the Kremlin.

Bird view of the chocolate squareProgram section

Plan of the chocolate square

Section: pedestrian circulation

View of the west bank and the access to the chocolate square that opens out to the water underlining the beauty of the old factory building.

The pedestrian circulation flows down from the main bridge to the tip of the island with a complex system of small squares and skywalks, guiding the people through the hidden secrets of the island


>>Мыс стрелки

>>StrelkaTip

729070398135960396910743039



programretail


creative studios

kindergarden



parking

8889 628 1692 3726 8724 1351410023



retail

clubs


creative studios


working/living

parking

3092 666 1114 7772 7984 75601953 903



programretail

fitness

clubs



working/living

technical services

parking

galleries

creative studios


3092 1053 706 351 1264 2159 3602



programretail


parking

yacht club

creative studios

clubs


Мыс стрелки /StrelkaTip


The tip of the island is the arrival point of the entire complex. A new pedestrian bridge is proposed in the end of the east bank to connect the island with the art museum on the other side of the river. Due to its unique position the tip is mainly dedicated to functions that can attract people like cafe and restaurants, night clubs, yacht club and shops. A considerable amount of land is dedicated to open green spaces and the entire location is open out to the

riverfront. Along the final part of the westbank a system of piers for leisure and open air activities is proposed. The main building, acting as a spectacular frame for the entire new development, hosts not only retail and public functions but also a number of exclusive apartments in the last two floors that will enjoy the nail biting view of the city centre.

Bird view of the tip of the island

Program section

Plan of tip of the island

>>Восточный берег

>>EastBank

729070398135960396910743039



programretail


creative studios

kindergarden



parking

8889 628 1692 3726 8724 1351410023



retail

clubs


creative studios


working/living

parking

3092 666 1114 7772 7984 75601953 903



programretail

fitness

clubs



working/living

technical services

parking

galleries

creative studios


3092 1053 706 351 1264 2159 3602



programretail


parking

yacht club

creative studios

clubs



Восточный берег/EastBank The development of the east bank of the island is much more residential oriented. The project wants to create a quite and relaxing environment through the complete redesigning of the relationship with the river. The residential buildings are conceived as suspended piers that lean out in the water. The ground floor is characterized by the waving line of the bank that will host quite open spaces to enjoy the riverfront as well as cafe, some shops, fitness

and water related activities. The residential units are partly thought for a high income and partly for a medium income target. The differentiation of the resident income level together with the presence of creative studios and working/living lofts will highly contribute to create a lively and dynamic variety in the neighborhood.

Plan of the east bank

Program section

Bird view of the east bank

>>Северная сторона

>>NorthSide

729070398135960396910743039



programretail


creative studios

kindergarden



parking

8889 628 1692 3726 8724 1351410023



retail

clubs


creative studios


working/living

parking

3092 666 1114 7772 7984 75601953 903



programretail

fitness

clubs



working/living

technical services

parking

galleries

creative studios


3092 1053 706 351 1264 2159 3602



programretail


parking

yacht club

creative studios

clubs


Северная сторона /NorthSide

Bird view of the chocolate squareProgram section

Plan of the north side


The north side of the new development is characterized by the presence of the tower typology. That choice come from the issue of find a spacial relationship with the massive residential building that acts as spectacular backcloth of the entire area. The tower typology allows to keep a high density of residential units and activities but leaving a large amount of open space in the ground floor that can become a park. On the other hand the

height of the new constructions allows the project to provide spectacular penthouses and cafe or restaurants with roof garden with probably one of the best view of the city. The towers are grounded in a base floor that hosts retail spaces, creative studios and public facilities in order to provide services for the residents and keep the park always active and lively, taking advantage from the direct connection with the new planned metro station.


РуководителиTutors

Dipl.-Ing. Arch. Thomas Stellmach is founding partner of UBERBAU Architecture and Urbanism in Berlin. Born in Freiburg, Germany, he has studied Architecture and Philosophy at TU Berlin and UPC Barcelona. He is an experienced urbanist and designer of a wide variety of projects of all scales. Thomas focuses on design for complex urban situations, where issues conflict and merge. Recent examples of his work are Europe’s largest urban design commission, Project A101 in Russia and the supervision of the UK’s largest residential development, Barking Riverside in London for the Rotterdam based practice maxwan a&u. Besides directing his office, he teaches at the renowned Berlage Institute and the Academie voor Bouwkunst, both in Rotterdam, and runs the online architecture magazine dysturb.net. He was a guest lecturer on urban design and architecture at the University for Science and Arts in Aleppo, Syria and is currently shaping an urban vision for its 2.6 Million people.

Vedran Mimica Educated as an architect, he was a lecturer at the Faculty of Architecture at the University of Zagreb and a postgraduate researcher at the Delft University of Technology prior to joining the Institute. He has supervised and taught numerous design studios, seminars, master classes at the Institute and numerous international venues. He initiates and organizes a series of annual International Design Seminars in Zagreb, Croatia. An active writer on architecture and architectural education, in 2007 he coauthored Contemporary Croatian Architecture: Testing Reality and contributed to the volume Project Zagreb: Transition as Condition, Strategy, Practice published by Actar Publishers in association with the Graduate School of Design at Harvard University. He is also the author of Notes on Children, Environment and Architecture. He recently completed Croatian Archipelago New Lighthouses, a joint initiative of the Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Berlage Institute and the Croatian Architects’ Association. Focusing on the future of tourism development along the Croatian coastline, this two-year research project investigated processes to better integrate the natural landscape and local culture into a content witnessing accelerated pressure by global economic forces. He led the curatorial team for the International Architecture Biennale Rotterdam 2007.
