Sergey Skuratov: “By and large, the project has been realized in line with the original ideas”

Following our own reflections on the place of Garden Quarters – completed in 2024 – within Moscow’s architectural history, we sit down with its chief architect Sergey Skuratov. This conversation does not aim to answer all of our questions – some details may have been forgotten, while others are impossible to forget – but we believe it offers some new perspectives on this seemingly well-known project.

zooming — “Garden Quarters”, the public space, 2024. View of Block 3

Copyright: Photo © Daniel Annenkov / provided by Sergey Skuratov Architects

Archi.ru:
So, the project is complete, and the pond at its center has been filled with water – we’ve seen it. In the fall, it was partially drained. Will there be an ice rink eventually?

Sergey Skuratov:
At the final stage of development, the pond was slightly reduced at the request of the developer. In my opinion, that’s not a bad thing – it created more surrounding space and allowed for more trees.

As for the ice rink – it was indeed designed but has not yet been realized. We provided for everything, down to the smallest details, including the steps that lead to it. The pond is about 60 cm deep, while an ice rink only needs 10 cm, and it requires a proper access point, which we also designed.

In December, I learned that the rink might not be built. If that’s the case, it’s a big disappointment. I still hope that the developer – now the company Sminex – will reconsider their decision.

The pond, in a way, provides a good starting point to discuss the project itself. Garden Quarters is a large and well-known project. What does it mean to you personally?

This is the longest-running project in my career and for my company, which turns 23 this year. It lasted 18 years and reached the finish line, let’s say, with a few losses. The ownership changed hands four times – one owner would sell, another would buy, each bringing their own vision. And each new owner was surprised to learn that there was an architect (who the heck is this guy?) insisting on certain things… In hindsight, maybe that was predictable, but I wasn’t prepared for it. There were moments that the losses felt irreparable. Over time, I came to accept the fact that life reshapes things differently than we initially plan. By and large, however, I’d say that, yes, the project was realized largely in line with the original ideas.

So, you are satisfied with the result, aren’t you?

One thing is certain: I’m relieved that it’s finally complete – the central connecting part is finished, and the entire complex as well. At last, we can see the space that we envisioned back in 2006. Eighteen years ago, it was all just an outline – the specific architecture of the buildings and spaces took shape later on and underwent significant changes at every stage of design.

Let’s go over the project’s history briefly, starting with the 2006 competition.

I don’t remember all the details anymore, but about 18 teams were competing. The competition invited all the top Moscow-based and international architecture firms of the time. The jury was led by Ilya Lezhava and Vyacheslav Glazychev – two highly respected intellectuals. Ilya Lezhava understood us better than anyone; in a way, he was a mentor to all of us. Both he and Glazychev advocated for preserving the factory buildings, although, to be honest, there wasn’t much architectural value left on the site by then. The competition proposals were split into two major groups: some teams preserved remnants of the Kauchuk factory, while others chose to start from scratch, which also made sense – on an empty site, you have more freedom to explore different possibilities. In the end, the jury selected two winners: “by points”, Yuri Grigoryan’s proposal – favoring preservation – came out on top, while my project, which called for full demolition but offered a compelling spatial concept, was its closest competitor.

The final decision was left to the client. Over the next month and a half, they held discussions with both Yuri and me. The preservation option was, on one hand, not very economically viable and, on the other, didn’t fully align with what the developer wanted. In the end, they chose me to develop the master plan, with the condition that certain valuable elements would be preserved. Ultimately, the only part that remained was the façade of the factory’s administration building, designed by Klein, facing Usachevskaya Street, along with the volume of the structure situated immediately behind it.

Did the first concept already include the artificial pond?

Yes, but it was more of an elongated waterway, like a fragment of a river. It had two banks – one “Asian” and one “European” – almost like in some game of chess. The smaller buildings were clustered in the center, while the taller, more urban ones, were positioned along the edges. In the early stages, for a short period, Evgeny Ace acted as a consultant for the developer. I recently found an old photo of us sitting together, discussing something. It was during those conversations that the idea of the pond and central zone crystallized. We analyzed various iconic public spaces in Moscow, trying to understand what made them popular, and we all agreed that a pond was a key urban-forming element.

But we also had to consider the phased construction of the blocks and the fact that they would emerge sequentially. This led to the idea of a cross-shaped composition. I must say, at first, the client was hesitant about including a public urban space inside the complex – “How will we operate it?” they asked, even suggesting that the center should be built up as well. But I insisted: “No, it is imperative that there be an open void in the center”.

“Khamovniki” quarter. Project, 2007

Copyright: © Sergey Skuratov ARCHITECTS
“Khamovniki” quarter. Project, 2007

Copyright: © Sergey Skuratov ARCHITECTS

Alexander Kuzmin [Moscow’s chief architect from 1996 to 2012 – Ed.] supported this idea and, in fact, backed the project as a whole. He happened to visit our studio just when the main client was there and said, “Great idea, don’t redraw anything – just build it as is.”

Some time later, when the concept was practically finalized, approved by the client, and endorsed by Kuzmin, a design code was developed, along with a phased construction timeline. At that point, the idea arose to invite other architects to design some of the buildings – not all of them, just a handful. The developers understood that if too many different architects were involved, it would be difficult for me to maintain a cohesive vision. So they invited Yuri Grigoryan, Vladimir Plotkin, Sergey Tchoban, Ostozhenka, Art-Blya, and Alexey Kurennoi – who was a key figure in Moskomarkhitektura back in those days.

Who was easy to work with, and who was difficult?

Yuri Grigoryan was the easiest to collaborate with. We share similar views on how work should be done – first and foremost, together, by listening to each other. Also, Yuri liked brick and sculptural forms, just the way I did. I must say, he executed exactly what I had envisioned, yet his work remained distinctly his own, with a fair share of author vision and originality.

From the start, I kept sixteen buildings facing the pond for myself, period. I immediately told the client that it was crucial to create a cohesive urban space there, where all key aspects of form, detail, and material interaction would be carefully considered. Our studio handled the entire underground infrastructure, the landscape for the blocks, transformer substations, the community center, and the school. The school was always “my thing” – I expected it to land right into my hands. But, alas, it never did!

All the blocks were meant to be connected by a single road to school, which would be passing under a cantilevered structure – a laconic, solid volume designed with the same simplicity as the pond. The entire concept was based on contrast: the residential buildings were architecturally complex, while the school was strikingly simple, yet surprising in its own way.

How did you address regulatory requirements? Schools are supposed to have fenced-off grounds, aren’t they?

Yes, they are, but here is the thing: there was an entrance from Shibayevsky Drive for those who didn’t live in Garden Quarters, and there was a separate school route – a ringed pathway through all the courtyards via overhead bridges. From this elevated path, the children would descend to a second checkpoint, scan their cards, and enter. There was a staircase and an elevator. The second entrance could also be used for outdoor breaks – it provided an additional recreation area. Yes, two entrances are always more complicated than one, but we resolved all the issues. The school’s boundary ran along its façade. Back in 2007 or 2008, this was a feasible solution. We even passed the design review with it!

The concept for building a residential area in Moscow′s Khamovniki area, 2006

Copyright: © Sergey Skuratov ARCHITECTS
View from the central zone of garden Quarters. The “Novy Vzglyad” school as part of “Garden Quarters”, 2020

Copyright: © Sergey Skuratov ARCHITECTS

Can you remind me why the project was eventually changed?

It turned out that the client – by then the second owner of Garden Quarters, the company Inteko – transferred the area under the cantilever, which had been agreed upon as an easement between the school and the public space, into the ownership of the 3rd block. This was done secretly to obtain approval for increasing residential floor area. We only found out years later, when a new client took over the school project. Due to this reassignment, the space under the school’s cantilever lost its easement status, meaning it could no longer serve dual functions – and the cantilever itself became impossible. The new school client then decided to pursue a different, more cost-effective, and simpler project.

In my view, the school that was ultimately built didn’t fit into the intended spatial paradigm. It might have been a good, appropriate building elsewhere, but definitely not here. And the quality of construction seems subpar to me – they rushed it. The “School Road” had to be cut short; it no longer leads anywhere because the new school design didn’t account for its existence or any interaction with it. As a result, the space between the blocks “sank” and collapsed conceptually… even though, luckily, it did not ruin the central zone as a whole.

And then there’s the 5th block – yet another disappointment. We even proposed our own design for it, but the client at the time rejected it.

“Garden Quarters”, the public space, 2024

Copyright: Photo © Daniel Annenkov / provided by Sergey Skuratov Architects
“Garden Quarters”, the public space, 2024. 2nd quarter, the tower designed by SSA

Copyright: Photo © Daniel Annenkov / provided by Sergey Skuratov Architects

What ended up being built there, in my opinion, is atrocious. The worst part is that some people think it’s my architecture, for crying out loud! Just recently, friends called me – they bought an apartment in the 5th block. They say the views from the windows are fantastic, but the layouts aren’t half that great. What went wrong? Well, of course, the views are fantastic – overlooking my square and my buildings. But, yes, things did go wrong because we had no control over that block at all.

Multifunctional residential development in Khamovniki (Quarter 5 of "Sadovye Kvartaly" complex) © Sergey Skuratov Architects

Copyright: © Sergey Skuratov ARCHITECTS
Multifunctional residential development in Khamovniki (Quarter 5 of "Sadovye Kvartaly" complex) © Sergey Skuratov Architects

Copyright: © Sergey Skuratov ARCHITECTS

But initially, a community center was planned for the 5th block, right?

Yes – offices, a shopping center, some sports facilities. It was meant to be a mixed-use public center with a multi-screen cinema, a large supermarket, a co-working space, and a hotel. It would have formed a unified urban space together with the Usachevsky Market square. Residents could have reached it directly via underground access.

There was supposed to be a unified underground space, shared by all residents. All three underground levels were interconnected – it was designed as a real “underground city”. You could get into it in your car, drive underground to the shopping center, take an elevator down with a cart, load your groceries, and drive back to your block. Or perhaps visit your friends in a neighboring block, in warmth and comfort, regardless of the weather. The finishes were top-quality down there, by the way. Originally, a single maintenance service was planned, but when construction started in phases, separate homeowners’ associations formed in each block, and the first thing they did was divide the territory. Now they even have different rates for cleaning services… Sadly, that part didn’t work out.

There should have been more restaurants at the lower level by the pond – 10 to 12, like in a good resort town by the water. But in the 2nd block, World Class moved in with a 50-meter swimming pool, taking up a lot of the frontage facing the pond. We had to modify the design to accommodate it.

You mentioned an easement. How is land ownership structured in Garden Quarters? Is the land divided between the city and private owners?

The entire territory is privately owned, belonging to the residential complex. The public space resulted from our initial agreements with the client at the start of the project. In theory, if the residents of all the five blocks came together and made such a collective decision, they could close off the entire area with a fence – though practically, it would be extremely difficult, almost impossible, due to the spatial layout. But, yes, legally, it’s still possible.

We did consider granting the public space to the city through an easement, but we were very wary of that: if we handed it over, the quality of architecture would inevitably be compromised. The city simply wouldn’t have invested as much in landscaping. The space features expensive German-made Klinker brick, Swiss stone, all these precise slopes and verticals.

When working on Garden Quarters, did you have any European prototypes in mind, at least to convince the client?

Yes, many. We traveled with the clients to European cities – Rotterdam, Amsterdam, Copenhagen – in 2007–2008, studying urban practices, seeing how things actually worked in real life. Our clients were very progressive; they were absolutely fascinated by it all. There were plenty of examples, though not with this exact height and density… Actually, the density in Garden Quarters is quite low – 23.5 thousand m²/ha. By today’s standards, that’s a very low density.

However, back then, 18 years ago, we didn’t expect it to become so expensive. We envisioned our complex to be meant for the middle class, not the extremely rich people. At the time, those people lived on Ostozhenka, while our project was meant for the upper middle class. The idea was that these people would love restaurants and social life. We designed a truly European district – where you don’t have to go far from home to find every kind of activity. If you live in London or New York, you live in the city, not some closed-off “reservation”. You step outside into a public square, onto a city street. There’s a pond, kids playing in sandboxes, and right there, a café – you can step into a courtyard, and no one yells at you or kicks you out. We wanted Moscow to have that same level of comfort and openness.

But here… people seem to shy away from public life. They write complaints about how to shut down the public area – saying that all sorts of bloggers with cameras keep showing up, filming, doing fashion shoots, and the like.

So now, the residents are paying to maintain a space that everyone uses, and they’re not happy about it?

Yes, exactly. The costs of upkeep fall on the residents and tenants – including me, since our office is also in Garden Quarters now.

The office of Sergey Skuratov′s architectural company

Copyright: © Sergey Skuratov ARCHITECTS
The office of Sergey Skuratov ARCHITECTS

Copyright: © Sergey Skuratov ARCHITECTS

For us, it’s easier – if they ever do close the perimeter (which is unlikely), our entrance is on the outer side. The tenants around the pond, though, have it harder. Right now, there are mostly beauty salons, cosmetic businesses… but I think that will change over time as the complex evolves. Today, it’s beauty clinics – tomorrow, it’s restaurants. And restaurants need visitors who can freely walk in from the city.

Could the already-built public space be handed over to the city for maintenance?

As far as I know, such a prospect is being discussed. Maybe it’s possible. But we had planned to hand it over to the city before – and the city didn’t take it. After all, it’s not just about cleaning services. It’s about maintenance, replanting large trees, replacing Klinker brick, and, most importantly, managing the pond. I don’t think the city will take it now either.

It turns out, we created an expensive toy. It’s not that we didn’t think about how exactly it would operate – we did. But we were relying on somewhat different economic relationships, a different demographic composition; on the development of urban planning laws that would allow for more complex stories of ownership and function symbiosis. Perhaps we should have studied European experience more from an economic perspective, looking at the legislative framework. I must also admit that the neighborhoods with public life that impressed us in the Netherlands and Denmark were still arranged in a slightly simpler way.

What makes Garden Quarters so complicated as opposed to them?

The way functions and ownership are distributed in space, to start with. In Rotterdam, for example, if there’s underground urbanism, it’s clear-cut: the city is above, private property is below. No throughways, no overlapping spaces. Here, in Garden Quarters, everything intersects with everything. You can step out of a private garage on the third basement level and walk directly to the pond side restaurant tables. The six-meter parking wall? It’s fully glazed and retractable.

“Garden Quarters”, the public space, 2024

Copyright: Photo © Daniel Annenkov / provided by Sergey Skuratov Architects
“Garden Quarters”, the public space, 2024

Copyright: Photo © Daniel Annenkov / provided by Sergey Skuratov Architects

This whole project is a dream, in a way, a romantic dream. And we, the dreamers, happened to meet clients who were also romantic dreamers.

We didn’t separate boundaries vertically. The public pedestrian areas are literally the rooftops of restaurants and the fitness center. In theory, World Class could maintain its own roof. But the people walking above it aren’t the same ones swimming in the pool or lifting weights. And below it all? A massive three-level parking structure. This allowed us to connect everything beautifully – you can enter the gym from the parking garage and then step right out to the pond. But to slice these three-dimensional solutions into neat legal boundaries? That’s nearly impossible. Honestly, underground urbanism is a huge problem for us. The regulations just don’t work.

What did Garden Quarters teach you? Besides the experience of defending your decisions, dealing with the loss of some parts of them, and accepting transformations in a large project? Working with underground urbanism and expansive public spaces integrated into private territory?

Underground urbanism has always been part of our projects, both before and after. As has the desire to open up spaces for the city and make it permeable. This is present in our projects before and after, and in the works of our teachers. Garden Quarters is just a stage in the experimentation with multi-level and public spaces within residential complexes. It’s a fascinating topic, but I would say it’s a subject for a separate discussion.

“Garden Quarters”, the public space, 2024

Copyright: Photo © Daniel Annenkov / provided by Sergey Skuratov Architects
“Garden Quarters”, the public space, 2024

Copyright: Photo © Daniel Annenkov / provided by Sergey Skuratov Architects

21 January 2025

Interviewed by:
Julia Tarabarina
Translated by:
Anton Mizonov

Headlines now

Interview

Sergey Skuratov: “By and large, the project has been realized in line with the original ideas”

In this issue, we talk to the chief architect of Garden Quarters, looking back at the history and key moments of a project that took 18 years to develop and has now finally been completed. What interests us most are the transformations that the project underwent during construction, and the way the “necessary void” of public space was formed, which turned this remarkable complex into a fragment of a whole new type of urban fabric – not just at the horizontal “street” level but in its vertical structure as well.

Object

A Unique Representative

The recently concluded year 2024 can be considered the year of completion for the “Garden Quarters” residential complex in Moscow’s Khamovniki. This project is well-known and, in many ways, iconic. Rarely does one manage to preserve such a number of original ideas, achieving in the end a kind of urban planning Gesamtkunstwerk. Here is a subjective view from an architecture journalist, with an interview with Sergey Skuratov soon to follow.

Object

Field of Life

The new project by the architectural company PNKB (an acronym for “Design, Research, and Advisory Bureau”), led by Sergey Gnedovsky and Anton Lyubimkin, for the Kulikovo Field Museum is dedicated to the field as a concept in its own right. The field has long been a focus of the museum’s thorough and successful research. Accordingly, the exterior of the new museum building is gentler than that of its predecessor, which was also designed by PNKB and dedicated specifically to the historic battle. Inside, however, the building confidently guides the visitor from a luminous atrium along a spiral path to the field – interpreted here as a field of life.

Object

A Paper Clip above the River

In this article, we talk with Vitaly Lutz from the Genplan Institute of Moscow about the design and unique features of the pedestrian bridge that now links the two banks of the Yauza River in the new cluster of Bauman Moscow State Technical University (MSTU). The bridge’s form and functionality – particularly the inclusion of an amphitheater suspended over the river – were conceived during the planning phase of the territory’s development. Typically, this approach is not standard practice, but the architects advocate for it, referring to this intermediate project phase as the “pre-AGR” stage (AGR stands for Architectural and Urban Planning Approval). Such a practice, they argue, helps define key parameters of future projects and bridge the gap between urban planning and architectural design.

Review

Living in the Architecture of One’s Own Making

Do architects design houses for themselves? You bet! In this article, we are examining a new book by TATLIN publishing house. This book – unprecedented for Russia – features 52 private homes designed and built by contemporary architects for themselves. It includes houses that are famous, even iconic, as well as lesser-known ones; large and small, stylish and eccentric. To some extent, the book reflects the history of Russian architecture over the past 30 years.

Object

A City Block Isoline

Another competition project for a residential complex on the banks of the Volga in Nizhny Novgorod has been prepared by Studio 44. A team of architects led by Ivan Kozhin concluded that using a regular block layout in such a location would be inappropriate and developed a “custom design” approach: a chain of parceled multi-section buildings stretching along the entire embankment. Let’s explore the features and advantages of this unconventional method.

Report

Competition: The Price of Creativity?

Any day now, we’re expecting the results of a competition held by the “Samolet” development group for a plot in Kommunarka. In the meantime, we share the impressions of Editor-in-Chief Julia Tarabarina, who managed to conduct a public talk. Though technically focused on the interaction between developers and architects, the public talk turned into a discussion about the pros and cons of architectural competitions.

Object

Terraced Design

The “River Park” residential complex has confidently and securely shaped the Nagatinsky Backwater shoreline. Featuring a public embankment, elevated courtyards connected by pedestrian bridges, and brick façades, the development invites exploration of its nuanced response to the surrounding context, as well as hints of the architects’ megalithic design thinking.

A Kremlin’s Core and Meteorite Fragments

We continue our coverage of the competition projects for the residential district that the development company GloraX plans to build along the embankment of the Rowing Channel in Nizhny Novgorod. ASADOV Architects approached the concept through a deep dive into local identity, using storytelling to pinpoint a central idea for the design: the master plan and composition are imagined as if a meteorite had struck a “proto-Kremlin”. Sounds weird? Find more details below!

Contest Results

The Volga Regatta

GloraX plans to develop a residential complex spanning 14 hectares along the Volga River in Nizhny Novgorod. The winning design in a closed-door competition, created by GORA Architects, features housing typologies ranging from townhouses to terraced high-rise slabs, a balance of functions, diverse ways of engaging with the water, and even a dedicated island (no less!) for the city residents.

Object

Life Plans

The master plan for the residential district “Prityazheniye” (“Gravity”) in Naberezhnye Chelny was developed by the architectural company A.Len, taking into account the specific urban planning context and partially implemented solutions of the first phase. However, the master plan prioritized its own values: a green framework, a system of focal points, a hierarchy of spaces, and pedestrian priority. After this, the question of what residents will do in their neighborhood simply doesn’t arise.

Object

A New Track

We took a thorough look at D_Station, a railcar repair depot dating back to 1906, recently reconstructed while preserving its century-old industrial structure, upon the project by Sergey Trukhanov and T+T Architects. Though work on the interiors – set to house restaurants and public spaces – is still underway, the building’s exterior already offers plenty to see. Visitors can explore the blend of old and new brickwork, appreciate the architect’s unique interpretation of ruin aesthetics, and enjoy the newly built pedestrian route that connects the Citydel Business Center’s arches to Kazakova Street.

Report

Four Different Surveys

The “Explore the City” competition, organized this year by the Genplan Institute of Moscow, stands out as a pretty unconventional one for the architectural field but aligns perfectly well with the character of urban planning work. The winning project analyzed contemporary residential complexes, combining urban planning insights with a realtor’s perspective to propose a hybrid approach. Other entries explored public centers, motivations for car ownership, and housing vacancy rates. A fifth participant withdrew. Here’s a closer look at the four completed works.

Report

Scheduled Evolution

ASADOV Architects unveiled the EvyCenter pavilion, a microcultural hub for fostering personal growth, organizing workshops, and doing gymnastics. Additionally, this pavilion serves as a prototype for a scalable country house, drawing inspiration from the “Loskutok” project, and constructed from CLT panels in a factory. This marks the beginning of a developer project initiated by the architectural firm (sic!), which is seeking partners to expand both small Evy settlements and even larger Evy cities, which are, according to Andrey Asadov, aimed at fostering the “evolutionary” development of the people who will inhabit them.

Object

The Golden Crown

The concept for a dental clinic in Yekaterinburg, developed by CNTR Studio, revolves around the idea of a “mouth full of gold”: pristine white porcelain stoneware walls are complemented by matte brass details. To avoid an overly literal interpretation, the architects focused on the building’s proportions, skillfully navigating between sunlight requirements and fire safety regulations.

News

Flexibility and Integration

Not long ago, we covered the project for the fourth phase of the ÁLIA residential complex, designed by APEX. Now, we’ve been shown different fence concepts they developed to enclose the complex’s private courtyards, incorporating a variety of public functions. We believe that the sheer fact that the complex’s architects were involved in such a detail as fencing speaks volumes.

Object

A Step Forward

The HIDE residential complex represents a major milestone for ADM architects and their leaders Andrey Romanov and Ekaterina Kuznetsova in their quest for a fresh high-rise aesthetic – one that is flexible and layered, capable of bringing vibrancy to mass and silhouette while shaping form. Over recent years, this approach has become ADM’s “signature style”, with the golden HIDE tower playing a pivotal role in its evolution. Here, we delve into the project’s story, explore the details of the complex’s design, and uncover its core essence.

Object

Gold in the Sands

A new office for a transcontinental company specializing in resource extraction and processing has opened in Dubai. Designed by T+T Architects, masters of creating spaces that are contemporary, diverse, flexible, and original, this project exemplifies their expertise. On the executive floor, a massive brass-clad partition dominates, while layered textures of compressed earth create a contextually resonant backdrop.

Object

Layers and Levels of Flight

This project goes way back – Reserve Union won this architectural competition at the end of 2011, and the building was completed in 2018, so it’s practically “archival”. However, despite being relatively unknown, the building can hardly be considered “dated” and remains a prime example of architectural expression, particularly in the headquarters genre. And it’s especially fitting for an aviation company office. In some ways, it resembles the Aeroflot headquarters at Sheremetyevo but with its own unique identity, following the signature style of Vladimir Plotkin. In this article, we take an in-depth look at the United Aircraft Corporation (UAC) headquarters in the Moscow agglomeration town of Zhukovsky, supplemented by recent photographs from Alexey Naroditsky – a shoot that became only recently possible due to the fact that improvements were finally made in the surrounding area.

Object

Light and Shadow

In this article, we delve into the architectural design of the “Chaika” house by DNK ag architects, which was recently completed in 2023 as part of the collection of signature designs at ZILArt. As is well-known, all the buildings in this complex follow a design code, yet each one is distinct. This particular building stands out not only for its whiteness and minimalism but also for the refined use of a limited number of techniques that, together, create what can confidently be called synergy.

View

Casus Novae

A master plan was developed for a large residential area with a name of “DNS City”, but now that its implementation began, the plan has been arbitrarily reformatted and replaced with something that, while similar on the surface, is actually quite different. This is not the first time such a thing happens, but it’s always frustrating. With permission from the author, we are sharing Maria Elkina’s post.

Report

Treasure Hunting

The GAFA bureau, in collaboration with Tegola and Arkhitail, organized an expedition to the island of Kilpola in Karelia as part of Moskomarkhitektura’s “Open City” festival. There, amidst moss and rocks, the students sought answers to questions like: what is the sacred, where does it dwell, and what sustains it? Assisting the participants in this quest were landscape engineer Evgeny Levin, artist Nicholas Roerich, a moose, and the lack of cellular connection. Here’s how the story unfolded.

Object

Depths of the Earth, Streams of Water

In the Malaya Okhta district, the Akzent building, designed by Stepan Liphart, was constructed. It follows a classic tripartite structure, yet it’s what you might call “hand-drawn”: each façade is unique in its form and details, some of which aren’t immediately noticeable. In this article, we explore the context and, together with the architect, delve into how the form was developed.

Object

Fir Tree Dynamics

The “Airports of Region” holding is planning to build an airport in Karachay-Cherkessia, aiming to make the Arkhyz and Dombay resorts more accessible to travelers. The project that won in an invitation-only competition, submitted by Sergey Nikeshkin’s KPLN, blends natural imagery inspired by the shape of a conifer seed, open-air waiting spaces, majestic large trees, and a green roof elevated on needle-like columns. The result is both nature-inspired and WOW.

Object

A Brick Shell

In the process of designing a clubhouse situated among pine trees in a prestigious suburban area near Moscow, the architectural firm “A.Len” did the façade design part. The combination of different types of brick and masonry correlates with the volumetric and plastique solutions, further enhanced by the inclusion of wood-painted fragments and metal “glazing”.

Report

Word Forms

ATRIUM architects love ambitious challenges, and for the firm’s thirtieth anniversary, they boldly play a game of words with an exhibition that dives deep into a self-created vocabulary. They immerse their projects – especially art installations – into this glossary, as if plunging into a current of their own. You feel as if you’re flowing through the veins of pure art, immersed in a universe of vertical cities, educational spaces – of which the architects are true masters – and the cultural codes of various locations. But what truly captivates is the bold statement that Vera Butko and Anton Nadtochy make, both through their work and this exhibition: architecture, above all, is art – the art of working with form and space.

Object

Flexibility and Acuteness of Modernity

Luxurious, fluid, large “kokoshniks” and spiral barrel columns, as if made from colorful chewing gum: there seem to be no other mansion like this in Moscow, designed in the “Neo-Russian-Modern” style. And the “Teremok” on Malaya Kaluzhskaya, previously somewhat obscure, has “come alive with new colors” and gained visibility after its restoration for the office of the “architectural ecosystem” as the architects love to call themselves. It’s evident that Julius Borisov and the architects at UNK put their hearts into finding this new office and bringing it up to date. Let’s delve into the paradoxes of this mansion’s history and its plasticity. Spoiler: two versions of modernity meet here, both balancing on the razor’s edge of “what’s current”.

Interview

Yuri Vissarionov: “A modular house does not belong to the land”

It belongs to space, or to the air... It turns out that 3D printing is more effective when combined with a modular approach: the house is built in a workshop and then adapted to the site, including on uneven terrain. Yuri Vissarionov shares his latest experience in designing tourist complexes, both in central Russia and in the south. These include houseboats, homes printed from lightweight concrete using a 3D printer, and, of course, frame houses.

Object

Moscow’s First

“The quality of education largely depends on the quality of the educational environment”. This principle of the last decade has been realized by Sergey Skuratov in the project for the First Moscow Gymnasium on Rostovskaya Embankment in the Khamovniki district. The building seamlessly integrates into the complex urban landscape, responding both to the pedestrian flow of the city and the quiet alleyways. It skillfully takes advantage of the height differences and aligns with modern trends in educational space design. Let’s take a closer look.

Object

Looking at the Water

The site of Villa Sonata stretches from the road to the water’s edge, offering its own shoreline, pier, and a picturesque river panorama. To reveal these sweeping views, Roman Leonidov “cut” the façade diagonally parallel to the river, thus getting two main axes for the house and, consequently, “two heads”. The internal core – two double-height spaces, a living room and a conservatory, with a “bridge” above them – makes the house both “transparent” and filled with light.