Charles Renfro: “We wanted to create a park that you could get lost in and also rediscover the city there.”

Diller Scofidio + Renfro and Hargreaves Associates, who together with Citymakers form the design consortium responsible for the Zaryadye Park architectural and landscape concept, discuss the creation, transformation, and realization of their project that is pivotal for Moscow.

Nina Frolova

Interviewed by:
Nina Frolova

24 July 2017

– When we take Zaryadye Park project as a whole, what do you consider to be its main features?

Charles Renfro, Diller Scofidio + Renfro:
– From my point of view, the park is not about any one particular place but about a set of encounters that, taken together, form a new kind of experience that’s completely unique. It begins in a very critical way – meaning the front door. Although the park is very porous, you can enter it in at many points, but we imagine that majority of the people will enter the park from the Red Square, at the northwest corner close to St. Basil’s Cathedral. That’s where we establish the kind of mood and atmosphere shift that we hope the park can achieve, through something that we have termed “wild urbanism”. This is a specific overlay and merger of the urban conditions of Red Square and the surrounding blocks of Moscow with the natural environments that are found around Moscow and around Russia. This is a kind of doubling up of environmental quality – one natural and one man-made. There are many other places in the park that further elaborate on the idea of environmental augmentation, in such a way that one is outside, but with a different experience of nature. It does not feel exactly like a forest, but rather like a new kind of landscape that is made specifically for this place. While we believe that the park is distinct from Moscow, it’s natural, you can lose yourself there. It’s also a place where visitors rediscover Moscow, through lookouts and visual connections that are unusual; these vantage points, on the top of the hill, or hanging out over the river, or adjacent to the city streets within this kind of protected natural environment, are new and did not previously exist. The park is a place apart from Moscow, but actually it rooted in Moscow as well. In that regard, it recalls our studio’s work on the High Line park in New York, which is elevated 30 feet above the city streets but is also visually connected to every part of New York. It is actually a way to re-engage with the city.


Ken Haines, Hargreaves Associates:
– What we think is special, different, and unique about this park is the integration of architecture and landscape, and the blurring of boundaries and lines. On a large scale, with buildings tucked into the topography, and also at a detailed level, with the way that paving doesn’t have a distinct edge. It is integration of paving and planting, not paving with a curb and then planting; it’s integrational at multiple levels.

– At first, when you presented your competition project, it was, I suppose, the most spectacular of all the finalists’ works. It was quite a brave thing to propose something like this in the heart of Moscow, considering the historical context, UNESCO site, and so on. What was your goal when you did it? Did you think that Moscow needed something spectacular – like an amusement park?
Charles Renfro:
– I would answer this in three ways. One way is to say that the brief for the project contained a lot of enclosed space that would be traditionally made as a building. And, in fact, we have a lot of enclosed space underneath the surface of the park. So, the first response was to not put buildings on the park, and to come up with a system that integrates landscape and architecture in such a way that the built form is for the most part hidden. In certain views, it’s completely gone, and, in other views, it reveals itself as the building fronts. Our tactical solution was to make the built enclosed form less present. We believe that we came up with a completely unique response to this site, and to the program for enclosed spaces, where landscape and architecture are merged, and a kind of new formal language emerged. That new formal language achieves two things: it brings a kind of unmistakable contemporaneity to the center of Moscow – there is a great deal of glazing, and of long-span and cantilevered structures. The design is very subdued, in that it’s underneath the landscape; it doesn’t have much of a skyline presence, and doesn’t compete with the existing monuments of Moscow. At the same time, it doesn’t sound shy. It doesn’t say: “You know, I am not something new!” It says: “I am actually this new way of dealing with the problem”. The approach acknowledges the historic features of central Moscow by not sitting on the land and exerting itself in iconic ways as built form. Some of the other competition entries placed buildings on the site, and made extravagant formal gestures; our entry was quite innovative and striking, but it purposefully did not compete with the UNESCO heritage site of the Kremlin and St. Basil’s. The goal was to create an experience for the city which complements the architectural experience of the rest of Moscow.
– But the bridge is iconic, I suppose? It asserts itself.
Charles Renfro:
– The bridge is definitely something one can take a picture of, but it is not a bridge in the traditional sense; it doesn’t go from Point A to Point B. However, the bridge is positioned over the river to give people a completely unique experience of the water, being suspended some 10 meters above it. Its intention is to make a place to experience the city while on it, and not to look out or to think of it as the new icon of the park. Undoubtedly, it will receive a lot of attention. By the way, one of the things that has happened since we started working with the local contractors is that the building system changed into concrete, which gave it more mass, compared to the lightness of the steel bridge proposed in the original competition entry. This has resulted in a more imposing character; we don’t think it’s necessarily bad, it’s just different from our original intent.
– I see. And what about other changes? Perhaps, something that you changed while working on this project or something that changed because of some other forces?
Charles Renfro:
– If you look at the competition entry and what’s being built, all of the essential elements are there, including the different landscapes and their particular relationships to one another. We’re very pleased that it’s turned out this way. On the other hand, as is normal in any complex urban project that has many layers, there are forces at work that didn’t come to light until the project moved forward. For instance, the entire elevation of the park has risen several meters, and that, in effect, gave some of the elements of the architecture more presence than they were conceived of in the competition phase. The benefit to that elevation change is that there are more places in the park where you feel you’re linked to the city. But changes like this were dimensional and elevational, and not conceptual. We also would love to have been able to work more on the passive energy systems that were in the original plan. Many of them are not in place – the way that the architecture itself has been built into the landscape to trap heat and to let sun in, and to keep elements like the rain and snow off of you – that feature is still there. We initially proposed some systems of ground source heat, water circulation, and other various measure, that were taken out of the project for cost reasons – typical things that happen to projects – but those elements are totally invisible. And, frankly, the way that these spaces will feel and work is much the way we anticipated when we won the competition.
– But I suppose that now, after all these changes, the park wouldn’t get any sustainability awards and certificates? Or is it possible still?
Charles Renfro:
– This park is so much more sustainable than the Hotel Rossiya was (laughs) that actually I think it will get the highest level on that point alone. It’s unclear if the project qualifies for LEED or BREEAM points. Even in our altered environment the objective wasn’t to be a demonstrational project for sustainable systems. The objective was to show how humans can feel and observe and be conscious of passive systems. It is more of a demonstration project, to show people how the sun feels when it’s captured, and to reveal other sensory qualities.

Brian Tabolt, Diller Scofidio + Renfro:
– We were really interested in redirecting energy that was on the site, and then using it as a building material for the experiences. We proposed more active systems that were to be powered by a photovoltaic array on the site, that would actually harvest energy and use it for heating and cooling in the off-seasons. The photovoltaic array is actually still part of the grid shell; it will be used to power some of the lighting and other elements of the park. There is a lot of sustainable things about the park; it’s meant to be a repeat-visit place where visitors go back to again. It becomes a part of the city life; we were less interested in checklists of sustainability, and more interested in experiencing and engaging with energy, redirecting it throughout the year, and using the climate’s experiences. The passive shaping of the park creates cooler and warmer spaces.

David Chacón, Diller Scofidio + Renfro:
– One ideal that originally attracted our studio to the competition was the brief‘s stipulation that mandated that the park that would be used throughout the entire twelve months of the year. The attraction was not for spectacle design that would only exist for tourists. In winter, the park will be filled with locals, children, pensioners; it will be Moscow’s citizenry that will use the park.

– It’s also a very interesting question – this all-season experience: it’s a problem for every Moscow park – because of the shorter daytime and the harsh weather – especially during the twilight it could be very cold, and so on. What kind of measures are there for the winter experience, so to say?
Charles Renfro:
– The design to make augmented climates reveals our ambition to expand the comfortable spaces to the outside areas, and not just behind closed doors as you would normally expect. We’ve been trying to do that using passive means – with solar radiation, heat capture, and wind block. But we do have destinations within the park - one is a restaurant, the other is a market – which we imagine will be active year round. This concept is based on certain types of markets, like Chelsea Market in New York City; it’s not a mall and it has a vibrant market place feel with bespoke culinary items. There is also a large education center for children which will be used year round. The last element is the media center exhibiting the landscapes and cityscapes of Russia; this is a more tourist-oriented attraction, it’s the closest pavilion to Red Square. The philharmonic hall, which our studio did not design, has year round programming. People are coming there 250 nights a year, and, while that’s not in the middle of the park, it certainly gets people to the park. It can be thought of as a leisure center, where people go to listen to a symphony and then walk across the park to the restaurant.
Brian Tabolt:
– I would like to explain why there is a merger of architecture and landscape in the park. We were exploring various forms of shelter in relation to the cold environment, and imagining as a starting point that one could move through this outdoor space, but never be too far from a spot that would provide shelter from the cold. That could be standard trees that block the wind, or large overhangs that almost all the pavilions have. These features shelter visitors from the snow, the wind, or the rain – creating experiences that are not quite inside and not quite outside. We very deliberately and evenly distributed those elements throughout the park, meaning that it is not an expanse of park with the buildings clustered in one place. One can go into the park, and find a way to one of these cabins – they are like cabins, or caves in the woods – spend a little time there, warm up, and come back out into the park. This is how visitors could stay in the park for longer than an hour before feeling cold.
We worked closely with the engineering teams of Buro Happold and Transsolar to design the large grid shell over the philharmonic hall. Even though it’s completely open on the sides, the geometry between the shell and the hill captures and traps the heat of the sun during the day and makes this a warm bubble at the top. It works as a greenhouse with no doors. Visitors will walk up to the top, without going through a door, and will get warmer as they ascent. It won’t be a sunbathing spot, but one will be able to remove their coat and remain comfortable sitting and looking through the grid shell at the park, the Kremlin and St. Basil’s – even on a cold day.
– What do you think about the philharmonic hall project?
Charles Renfro:
– We actually have not had much involvement in the design of the philharmonic hall. We established a location for it and its attitude towards the park in the competition scheme, and that has been very much followed through in the final design. We are very appreciative that the concept has been held to, and even shocked in a way that the concept that we established – which was to have the building read as serious piece of architecture from the street side and as a serious piece of park from the other side – that’s a fairly radical concept – has been followed through. TPO “Reserve” has been designing the hall: they are a very good firm, and we worked with them on resolving the issues of the joint between the park and the philharmonic hall.


– In our climate zone, there are no leaves in autumn and winter and early spring, so the image of the park is completely different during the wintertime. How did you deal with it?
Ken Haines:
– I think we have a very interesting palette here, interesting for all of four seasons. For example, the birch trees: beautiful white bark in winter, stunning in itself, and very attractive for that reason alone. Also, these trees have really beautiful yellow leaves in the fall. The park will have a lot of perennials and grasses. Even in winter, grasses have a color and a structure to them. When they are not covered by snow, they move in the wind. There will be flowers in spring, movement in summer, a different color in fall, the structure in winter.
Charles Renfro
– And there’s a large section of evergreen trees as well that will stay green throughout the year, so there’s quite a bit of variety already.

– Did you take into account the difficult environmental problems of Moscow when you designed your park?
Ken Haines:
– Are you talking about the air quality?
– Air quality, but also the problem with the de-icing agents that are very harmful for plants.
Ken Haines:
– We did spend time talking about the operations and maintenance of the park, and, specifically, the snow removal, and how to do that in a way that will work with the plants instead of against the plants. Specifically, we talked about not using salt, which is bad for plants, and using alternative methods to remove snow and other products that don’t do the damage to plants. There are glycol products and other non-salt products that we recommended early on in the process. In terms of mechanical systems, we recommended brushing instead of plowing snow, because the plows do a lot of damage. The brushers are kinder and friendlier to paving systems.
– You have mentioned High Line at the start. I suppose, it is one of the most famous parks in the world now. Has the experience of designing High Line influenced your Zaryadye project?
Charles Renfro:
– Absolutely: it operated as a starting point for thinking about the way to make a new kind of park in a very dense urban environment. At the High Line, we invented a paver that allowed the green to grow through, referencing the ruin that the High Line was before we transformed it into a park. The way the paving works with the greenery was one of the initial thoughts we had about Zaryadye Park. Zaryadye Park is a field, rather than a linear park like the High Line, and in that field the paving would sometimes envelope the trees, sometimes split, sometimes turn into very soft pathways; in these ways it would constantly be transitioning between hard and soft and green. That was a starting point for us in terms of how to think about the park design. The other sentiment is that we love the way the High Line works as a sentinel, the place to see the city in a different way. I actually don’t think of the High Line as a park per se. I think of it as a viewing device first and foremost, that happens to have planting on it. People go there not to look at the trees and the greenery, but to really be in the city. And, thinking of Zaryadye Park and its central location in Moscow, we wanted to make sure that this was a park that to get lost in and think that you’re in a new kind of nature, but also be a place to rediscover the city. While it’s apart from Moscow, it actually is a part of Moscow, and very central to the way we want people to experience the center of Moscow now.

– Zaryadye is quite a large project, and also it took a long time to be completed…
Charles Renfro:
– Actually, not at all! (laughs) It’s not that big, and it actually happened very quickly!
– But, anyway, I suppose, you’ve got some experience of working as an architect in Russia. What are the main differences between American and Russian architectural practice?
Charles Renfro:
– Let me set the record straight first and foremost – we won the competition, and we did the master plan, and we also did the concept design for the park. However, since then we are actually design advisors to the project, and our Russian collaborators are the architects of the park. So, our experience is quite different here as it would be in America, where we would have had a hand in every bit of the design, detailing, and construction observation. We didn’t, at this park: we’ve been sort of high-level observers and advisors to help the team make the park align with the concept that we had; we’ve done quite a good job, considering that the profession, the building services, and the industry are not quite as advanced here as what one finds in Western Europe and America. There’s been a learning curve in a lot of respects, in order to achieve the design objectives. With this park, I think, there’s been a huge leap of faith and in understanding some advanced systems and technical expertise that we helped to bring to the table.
Brian Tabolt:
– There’s been a very optimistic spirit on the site – that’s been exciting. Even though there have been smaller landscape projects around Moscow, it’s really the first new major park here for a long time. So there’s not a lot of park experience or landscape experience for anybody. It’s amazing how much of original ambitions of the design were carried through so far. Even though the American processes in architecture and construction are very careful, procedural, and orderly – and that can be great and often gives us a great deal of control – it’s also slow and laborious, and sometimes risk averse. We were excited to find in Moscow a willingness to realize this quite ambitious project in a very short amount of time. I think it would have been harder to do this in the United States within this timeframe, with this kind of scale and complexity preserved.

Charles Renfro. Photo © Alessio Boni, courtesy of Diller Scofidio + Renfro
Ken Haines. Photo courtesy of Hargreaves Associates
Zaryadye Park. Construction photo © Ilya Ivanov
Zaryadye Park. Construction photo © Maria Krylova
Zaryadye Park. Construction photo © Maria Krylova
Zaryadye Park. Construction photo © Maria Krylova
Brian Tabolt. Photo courtesy of Diller Scofidio + Renfro
David Chacón. Photo courtesy of Diller Scofidio + Renfro
Zaryadye Park. Construction photo © Maria Krylova
Zaryadye Park. Construction photo © Ilya Ivanov
Zaryadye Park. Construction photo © Maria Krylova
Zaryadye Park. Construction photo © Ilya Ivanov
Zaryadye Park. Construction photo © Maria Krylova
Zaryadye Park. Construction photo © Maria Krylova
Zaryadye Park. Construction photo © Ilya Ivanov
Zaryadye Park. Construction photo © Ilya Ivanov
Zaryadye Park. Construction photo © Maria Krylova
Zaryadye Park. Construction photo © Ilya Ivanov
Zaryadye Park. Construction photo © Ilya Ivanov
Zaryadye Park. Construction photo © Ilya Ivanov

24 July 2017

Nina Frolova

Interviewed by:

Nina Frolova
Headlines now
Julius Borisov: “The “Island” housing complex is a unique project – we took it on with...
One of the largest housing projects of today’s Moscow – the “Ostrov” (“Island”) housing complex built by Donstroy – is now being actively built in the Mnevniky Floodplain. They are planning to build about 1.5M square meters of housing on an area of almost 40 hectares. We are beginning to examine this project– first of all, we are talking to Julius Borisov, the head of the architectural company UNK, which works with most of the residential blocks in this grand-scale project, as well as with the landscaping part; the company even proposed a single design code for the entire territory.
A Balanced Solution
The residential complex “Balance” on Moscow’s Ryazansky Prospekt is one of the large-scale, and relatively economical (again, by Moscow standards) housing projects. Its first phase has already been built and landscaped; the work on the others is in progress. Nevertheless, it has an integral internal logic, which is based on the balance of functions, height, and even image and space composition. The proposed solutions are recognizable and laconic, so that each of them was reduced by the authors to a graphic “logo”. To see everything, you have to flip through the pages and look through to the end.
Horror Vacui
In the city of Omsk, ASADOV architects took on a very challenging task: they are developing a concept of a public and residential complex, which involves reconstructing the city’s first thermal power station standing right next to Omsk’s first fortress. This territory has already seen a lot of projects designed for it, and the residential function of this land site has been the subject of heated debate. In this article, we are examining the project in question, aimed at developing a mid-scale city fabric suited for the historical center. We also examine the above-mentioned debate. Seriously, will this project save this place or will it bring it to ruin?
A Multi-Faced Grotto
This building, seemingly small, unremarkable, semi-ruined, and not even very ancient – the Grotto in the Bauman Garden – was restored by the “People’s Architect” architectural company with all the care applicable to a heritage monument. They preserved the romantic appeal of the ruins, added multimedia content, and explored the cascading fountain, which, as it turned out, was completely preserved. Brace yourself for a long story!
First among Equals
The building of a kindergarten in the town of Beloyarsky is more than just another example of a modern educational space. Its design began a long time ago; it is located in Russia’s Far North; it is also a state-owned facility that is subject to regulations, and had to cut costs during construction (as usual). However, the design is contemporary, the layout is modern, and the building feels very fresh. The project is planned to be replicated.
Gustave Falconnier
In the “ruin” wing of Moscow’s Museum of Architecture, an exhibition of “glass bricks” by Gustave Falconnier is open. These “bricks” are essentially the predecessors of glass blocks, but more complex and beautiful. The exhibition shows genuine “bricks”, buildings composed of them, the history of the destruction of Falconnier windows in the building of the State Archives, and it also became one of the reasons to revive this unique production technology.
​Streamline for City Canyons
Stepan Liphart has designed two houses for two small land sites situated in the area surrounding the Varshavsky Railway Station, which is being intensively developed now. The sites are situated close but not next to each other, and they are different, yet similar: the theme is the same but it is interpreted in different ways. In this issue, we are examining and comparing both projects.
​The Eastern Frontier
“The Eastern Arc” is one of the main land resources of Kazan’s development, concentrated in the hands of a single owner. The Genplan Institute of Moscow has developed a concept for the integrated development of this territory based on an analytical transport model that will create a comfortable living environment, new centers of attraction, and new workplaces as well.
A School of Our Time
On the eve of the presentation of the new book by ATRIUM, dedicated to the design of schools and other educational facilities, based on the architects’ considerable experience, as well as expert judgments, we are examining the Quantum STEM school building, constructed according to their project in Astana. Furthermore, this building is planned to be the first one to start a new chain. The architects designed it in full accordance with modern standards but sometimes they did break away from them – only to confirm the general development rules. For example, there are two amphitheaters in the atrium, and there is an artificial hill in the yard that is meant to make the flat terrain of the Kazakhstan steppe more eventful.
The Fluffy Space
Designing the passenger terminal of the Orenburg airport, ASADOV architects continue to explore the space theme that they first introduced in Saratov and Kemerovo airports. At the same time, the architects again combine the global and the local, reflecting topics inspired by the local conceptual context. In this case, the building is “covered” by an Orenburg downy shawl – an analogy that is recognizable enough, yet not literal; some will see the reference and some won’t.
The White Fitness Center
The white health and fitness center, designed by Futura Architects at the entrance to St. Petersburg’s New Piter residential complex, provides the developing area not only with functional but also with sculptural diversity, livening up the rows of the brick city blocks with the whiteness of its seamless facades, cantilevered structures, and dynamic inclined lines.
The New Dawn
In their project of a technology park to be built on the grounds of “Integrated Home-Building Factory 500” in Tyumen Oblast – the biggest in Russia – the HADAA architects preserve not just the industrial function of the giant hangar built in the late 1980s and 90% of its structures, but also respond to its imagery. They also propose a “gradient” approach to developing the available areas: from open public ones to staff-only professional spaces. The goal of this approach is to turn the technology park into the driver for developing the business function between the industrial zones and the future residential area in accordance with the Integrated Land Development program.
​Tame Hills for New Residents
T+T Architects have reported that they have completed the landscaping project for the yard of the first stage of Alexandrovsky Garden housing complex in Ekaterinburg – the landscape complements the contextual architecture, tailored for the buyers’ preferences and downtown standards, with bold neo modernist master strokes and lush and diverse vegetation.
The Crystal of the City Block
The typology and plastique of large housing complexes move with the times, and you can sometimes find new subtleties in the scope of seemingly familiar solutions. The Sky Garden complex combines two well-known themes, forming a giant residential area consisting of tall slender towers, placed at the perimeter of a large yard, in which a crossroads of two pedestrian promenades is “dissolved”.
Sunshine, Air, and Water
The construction of the “Solnechny” (“Sunny”) summer camp, designed by ARENA project institute, has been completed, the largest summer camp within the legendary Artek seaside resort for children. It was conceived still in Soviet time, but it was not implemented. The modern version surprises you with sophisticated engineering solutions that are combined with a clear-cut structure: together, they generate Asher-esque spaces.
​Art Deco at the Edge of Space
The competition project by Stepan Liphart – a high-end residential complex executed in a reserved classicist style in close proximity to the Kaluga Space Museum – responds equally well to the context and to the client’s brief. It is moderately respectable, moderately mobile and transparent, and it even digs a little into the ground to comply with strict height restrictions, without losing proportions and scale.
​A Hill behind the Wall
The master plan of a new residential area in Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk, developed by the Genplan Institute of Moscow with the participation of Kengo Kuma & Associates, is based on the complexities and advantages of the relief of the foothills: the houses are arranged in cascades, and multi-level improvement penetrates all the blocks, continuing in forest trails.
Going, Going, Gone!
The housing complex “Composers’ Residences” has been built in accordance with the project by Sergey Skuratov, who won the international competition back in 2011. It all began from the image search and “cutting off all spare”, and then implementing the recognizable Skuratov architecture. It all ended, however, in tearing down the buildings of the Schlichterman factory, whose conservation was stipulated by all the appropriate agencies prior to approving Skuratov’s project. This story seems to be educational and important for understanding the history of all the eleven years, during which the complex was designed and built.
The Life of Iron
The building of the Vyksa Metallurgy Museum, designed by Nikita Yavein and Sergey Padalko, provides for the natural aging of metal – it is planned that the iron will gradually rust – at the same time utilizing the advanced type of construction, based on metal’s ability to stretch. The building will be constructed from pipes and rolled steel supplied by OMK company, as well as from recycled bricks.
​And the Brook is Flowing
ASADOV Architects have designed a master plan for developing a residential area at the outskirts of Kaliningrad: a regular grid of housing blocks is enriched by large-scale public facilities, the main “artery” of the new area being the fortification channel that regains its original function.
Off We Go!
The new terminal of the Tomsk airport is being designed by ASADOV bureau. The architects keep on developing its identity, building the imagery upon the inventions of Nikolai Kamov, whose name the airport bears. The result is laconic, light, and, as always, levitating.
Maximum Flexibility
The Multispace Dinamo, which recently opened within the Arena business center, is an example of a project that is entirely based upon cutting-edge approaches and technologies. It is managed via a mobile application, special software was created for it, and the spaces are not just multifunctional but carefully mixed up, like some kind of jigsaw puzzle that allows the office workers to mix their working routine for better efficiency.
A Factory’s Path
Last week, the new center for constructivist studies “Zotov” hosted its first exhibition named “1922. Constructivism. The Inception”. The idea of creating this center belongs to Sergey Tchoban, while the project of the nearest houses and adjusting the building of the bread factory for the new museum function was done by the architect in collaboration with his colleagues from SPEECH. We decided that such a complex project should be examined in its entirety – and this is how we came up with this long-read about constructivism on Presnya, conservation, innovation, multilayered approach, and hope.
The Savelovsky Axis
The business center, situated right in the middle of a large city junction next to the Savelovsky Railway Station takes on the role of a spatial axis, upon which the entire place hinges: it spins like a spiral, alternating perfect glass of the tiers and deep recessions of inter-tier floors that conceal little windows invented by the architects. It is sculptural, and it claims the role of a new city landmark, in spite of its relatively small height of nine floors.
Parametric Waves
In the housing complex Sydney City, which FSK Group is building in the area of Shelepikhinskaya Embankment, Genpro designed the central city block, combining parametric facades and modular technology within its architecture.
The Multitone
The new interior of the Action Development headquarters can be regarded as an attempt to design the perfect “home” for the company – not just comfortable but broadcasting the values of modern development. It responds to the context, yet it is built on contrast, it is fresh but cozy, it is dynamic, yet it invites you to relax – everything of this coexists here quite harmoniously, probably because the architects found an appropriate place for each of the themes.
Refinement No Longer Relevant
A few days ago journalists were shown the building of Bread Factory #5, renovated upon the project by Sergey Tchoban. In this issue, we are publishing Grigory Revzin’s thoughts about this project.
The Comb of Strelna
In this issue, we are taking a close look at the project that won the “Crystal Daedalus” award – the “Veren Village” housing complex in Strelna, designed by Ostozhenka. Its low-rise format became a trigger for typological and morphological experiments – seemingly, we are seeing recognizable trends, yet at the same time there are a multitude of subtleties that are a pleasure to go into. Having studied this project in detail, we think that the award is well-deserved.
A Tectonic Shift
For several years now, Futura Architects have been working with the “New Peter” residential area in the south of St. Petersburg. In this article, we are covering their most recent project – a house, in which the architects’ architectural ideas peacefully coexist with the limitations of comfort-class housing, producing a “multilayered” effect that looks very attractive for this typology.
Three “Green” Stories
In this issue, we are examining three environmental urban projects showcased by the Genplan Institute of Moscow at the Zodchestvo festival. The scale of the projects is really diverse: from gathering information and suggestions from the residents on a city scale to growing meadow grass between houses to paintings, which, as it turned out, possess power to cure trees, healing their wounded bark. + a list of kinds of plants natural for Moscow to help the developer.