Live City Report 2007
by Tatiana Likhanova
2007
2007
According to UNESCO wording, St. Petersburg is an “absolute and only of a kind embodiment of the European idea of a regular and landscape harmonized city which has been under construction for 200 years on a vast land”.
It is now however, that this originality can be lost once and for all. The unprecedented construction boom the city now experiences does not reckon neither the Petersburg landscape, nor its town-planning traditions.
The town-planning designs and conceptions no longer bear the idea of architectural ensembles that always used to appear in plenty. This is clearly seen not only in the fact that on one hand, such ensembles as once planned composite whole are no longer planned. On the other, the new buildings are not correlated to the demand of them fitting into the architectural surroundings. Moreover, the existing ensembles are not taken into account, they are not preserved or in any way recognized as those of any particular value.
1. CANGING OF THE ST. PETERSBURG HISTORICAL PANORAMAS ASPECTS
The Embankments
The projects already put into life and still at the stage of planning that destructively interfere with the historical panoramas of the Neva (the housing estates as “Aurora”, “Mont Blanc”, “By the Rostra Pillars”, “The Silver Mirrors”, the business center of “GasProm-City”, et al.) have already been mentioned in our previous analytical report. Realization of another project, “The Europe Embankment”, assuming appearance of a united mega-complex all along the Nevka embankment on the passage between the Stock Exchange bridge and the Tuchkov bridge is also waiting for its turn.
The Squares
The St. Isaac’s Square
The construction of a new hotel on 4 Potchtamptskaya str. has already been completed. After agreement on the project the building gained a 6 meter glass dome which has irremediably marred the view over the Miatlev’s House (9, St. Isaac’s square) and appeared a horrid furuncle over the historical ensemble of the square. Apart from this, the hotel entrance has been “adorned” with a vulgar three-arc shed and a ponderous granite decoration. The ÊÃÈÎÏ claims that they have only agreed on the outer buildings and the increase in height happened without permission during the works on the inner part of the hotel. No-one however demanded from the builder to demolish this illegal constructional addition even regardless of the reconstruction project author’s denial of his authorship. The latter actually means the builder erected this superstructure according to his own crude project.
Another danger is the reconstruction of the |Lobanov-Rostovsky house (1, Voznesensky pr.) in order to make it a hotel. The famous “house with lions” is as well supposed get an additional glass-domed storey. This is the way the new owners are going to “improve” the architect August Montferrand’s creation.
The project of Montferrand’s creation “improvement” is lead by LLC “Yevgeniy Gerasimov and Partners”. The architect Y. Gerasimov has already contributed his mite in destruction the classical St. Petersburg ensembles. He is the author of the bulky parallelepiped that disfigured the Rossi’s complex at the Ostrovsky square. The building of the infamous “Fifth Element” residential construction in the very heart of the Primorsky Victory park, and the housing estate “A House by the Sea” that has swallowed up the whole north-eastern side of the same park are also his contributions.
Two more houses on the Voznesensky pr. (¹¹ 4-6 – 1798 and 1869 years of construction correspondingly) were passed over to LLC “R.E.D.” for building of a “boutique-hotel class complex”. The chief director of the LLC “R.E.D.” Dmitry Vorobjov announced recently during this “reconstruction” the height limit of the present surroundings will also be exceeded: “The façade is going to comprise five or six storeys and the yard area the number of storeys will be increased.” According to preproject proposals of the general designer (LLC “Grigorjev and Partners” the yard part is going to grow up to eight floors. Meanwhile the “reconstruction” commenced with demolition of the historical buildings (not only the outer line but also the wings). Even though the building ¹ 4 has surpassed major repairs (in 1965) in may 2004 the commission of experts declared the building to be in accident condition. This forestalled a St. Petersburg Government resolution on projecting and reconstruction of the buildings on Voznesensky prospect into a hotel complex (¹ 1283 on 31.08.2005) and delivered the new owner from the necessity of preserving the historical aspect.
The Schil house, a federal significance monument on 8/23, Voznesensky prospect famous for having been the place where Dostoyevsky lived and where he was arrested according to the Petrashevsky case is now a “White Nights” (“Belyje nochi”) commercial center. After its reconstruction the whole inside of the building was scrubbed out and the yard was covered with a glass dome. The building which the Schil house faces is the Engleterre hotel: the historical building was demolished and reconstructed with such a freedom of outer decoration that it resembles now more a Hollywood still than a real structure.
The Palace Square
The view surroundings of the main square of St. Petersburg is already about to be affected with the new construction that is already triggered. For example, the building on 4, Bolshaya Morskaya street (next to the General staff headquarters’ arc) the flats in which are commercialized as follows: “We sell the view over the Palace square!” On one of the Town-planning councils that was held recently with the governor V. Matvienko taking part this project was claimed a “very doubtful” and “dangerous”. It is obvious: if the square can be seen from the building then the building is even better seen from the square. The governor demanded: “ Write them off as it should be!” no sanctions however were taken on the matter. The builder is the “St. Petersburg revival” company which is a part of “LSR-group” belonging to the vice-governor’s Yuri Milchanov’s family.
The Vladimirskaya Square
In the end of the 1980-ies the historical house of A. Delwig, the house on the 19, Vladimirsky prospect and the Cathedral of St. Mother of Vladimir were saved thanks to the efforts of academician Dmitry Likhachev. The recent construction works however disfigured the ensemble and the composition of the square. In order to
Under threat is as well the “Arina Rodionovna” (the famous Alexander Pushkin’s nurse-maid) at the corner of Marata street and Kuznechny lane (25, Marata street, ascertained culture heritage monument): the Investment conception of reconstruction and development of the “Vladimirskaya square” investment zone in the context of the St. Petersburg reconstruction project (1998 – 2000) suggests considering it as resources for hotel construction.
The Ostrovsky Square
The construction of a hotel lead according to a project provided by the above-mentioned workshop “Yevgeniy Gerasimov and Partners” (with investments of an Indonesian company of “Samopoerna”) is now nearly over. This cumbrous building (7 storeys) made of lusterless stone with pretensions to look as an “Italian palazzo” has visually suppressed the building of the Alexandra theatre. The head of Society of Historical and Cultural Monuments Protection Vladimir Lisovsky has called this project “a logical completion of forced degradation process of the Anichkov palace and the Alexandra theatre ensemble system”. Yet the project is coordinated with Committee for City Planning and Architecture and Committee on State Control, Use and Protection of Historical and Cultural Landmarks.
The Alexandra theatre has gained an authorization on carrying out of exploration works on the area of more than 4,000 sq.m. on the 2K, Rossi street for building the 2nd theatre stage. Originally the idea was to provide 2,000 sq.m. but the site was enlarged since the governor V. Matvienko suggested to enlist the services of a private investor and for the latter to have benefit on the project – to include a commercial building alongside the 2nd stage and the storage facilities. The investor is the “Petersburg Estate” (“Peterburgskaya Nedvizhimost’”) company proposes to reduce the space of the theatre and the Vaganova ballet academy and fit in a hotel there (150-200 rooms). The project is developed by the Yuri Zemtsov workshop.
The Sennaya Square
The destruction of this square ensemble was started in 1960-ies by explosion of a temple and building a squalid overground metro pavilion and was actually finished by 2003. Then the glittering glass shopping centers, the conglomeration of kitch small architectural forms, commercial stalls and hoisting of an undesired “present” – a totally alien to the place half-transparent stele with the word “piece” in different languages all over it – this all finally killed all the harmony of the square’s architecture.
It should be noted that, beginning with the time of demolition of the buildings that formed the eastern corner of the square (from the Yefimova street up to the very corner of the square) the task of filling the gap in and recovery of the square’s perimeter became one of the most topical town-planning problem discussed by several generations of architects. The right decision (designed and organizational) could not be chosen for many years since the project for the neighbouring quarter was not yet produced. And then out of the blue and in a blink of a eye came the “Peak” mall the glass facades of which not only failed to fill in the “hole” in the square facade but locked it in.
The Preobrazhenskaya square
The new construction process (4, Preobrazhenskaya square – the building of the General consulate of Finland) has been executed with coarse violations of the town-planning legislation in force
Whoever built the fence it used to be a significant architectural detail of the square ensemble; its deliberately low line emphasized the vertical body of the cathedral. Now it now longer towers above the square but is placed in a certain “façade box” of the surrounding buildings. To make this possible the Savior Transfiguration cathedral (archs.: M. Zemtsov, P.Tresini, 1743-1754; V. Stasov, 1827-1829) was moved into the list of local significance monuments (2000). The story of such a demotion is muddy. The cathedral was later rehabilitated but the decision upon the new construction was being taken exactly in the period of the cathedral being a local significance monument – just by chance, obviously.
The Vosstaniya square
The design project of underground multifunctional complex is worked over now.
Experts characterize the consequences of realization of such project as unpredictable due to very complicated geodesy. In the XVIII century Ligovskiy channel was located here; it was dug out to supply the fountains of Summer Gardens with water (later it was “hidden” into a culvert). Geological investigations of the area of the square showed that underground building would set the grounds of about 100m of the area in motion. Here plenty federal significance monuments are located (Moscow railway station, “Ploshad Vosstaniya” metro station pavilion, several houses along the Ligovskiy str). Many of these buildings (including the Moscow railway station are put on wood substructure which is kept safe only with the help of subsoil waters. Changing of the subsoil waters level will lead to inevitable and rapid rotting, and the buildings become emergency.
That was the reason when in 2006 this project was aborted by previous investor “Otkritie investicii – Sankt-Peterburg” (daughter enterprise of the “Interros” company). But Saint-Petersburg government transmitted this investment area to the new investor “Aditium” (resolution ¹ 1391, 14.11.2006). “Aditium” will research the area with a view to build underground structure within 11 months.
The further destiny of the “pit” near the Moscow railway station is still indefinite. Lately the builder “Briz” has bought the territory to build there a great four-storied commercial and entertaining centre with the area more than 220 000 sq.m., of which 90 000 sq.m should be located under the ground (including as well a 3-level parking lot that will hold 2, 000 parking places). Cleanup activities are in progress now, the design of fronts was not yet approved. At the same time The Russian Railways shows interest in this area again to build the second special platform for high speed trains (it insists on the necessity of 24 hectares for attendsnt commercial needs). The territory however has already passed to the mall builders. At the very end of the year 2006 V. Matvienko promised to find out the solution of the problem in the nearest future.
The Nevsky prospect panorama
The view of Nevsky prospect is already changed by massive building near the Kazansky Cathedral (5, Kazanskaya str.) and tasteless shop “Perinniye Ryadi” (architect Mikhail Sadovskiy), which is called by arts critic as “caricature clone of the Gostiniy Dvor without any hint of a historical value but with the acid colours to catch people’s eyes”.
Two houses (55 and 59, Nevsky pr) were demolished in 2005. These were objects of cultural heritage, they were located in the conservation zo
The history of these two houses (Nevskiy pr, 55 and 59) is representative and unfortunately very typical for the town-planning politics of modern Saint-Petersburg government. Since the first reconstruction plan of house ¹ 57 has appeared specialists mentioned that such a capital reconstruction in the middle of Nevskiy prospect might have catastrophic consequences. And they happened. During the reconstruction the neighboring buildings were grown through with cracks, one building (Stremyannaya str) was demolished. There were no efforts to enforce historical buildings, after settling these houses were without roofs, not heated for years, with many trees growing on the highest floors, without any protection from dangerous external influence. The debt at that moment was several hundreds of millions dollars. In 2000 the city has taken engagement to transmit several buildings (Nevskiy pr, 55 and 59, Stremyannaya str, 6 and 10) to the investor who would pay off a debt. Thus the city transmitted hotel Nevskiy palace and 4 neighboring houses to the Maltese company Corinthia Hotels International. Corinthia Hotels International declared that it is necessary to demolish historical buildings in 2002. At that time the government didn’t approved the project, but the new governor V. Matvienko has approved the project in 2004.
All the declarations about critical conditions and status of the buildings are bluff. This is confirmed by the destiny of another house (Vladimirskiy pr, 18). Its condition was worse some years ago and there was a decision to demolish the building. However the Cultural department obliged Leningrad government to repair the building and to save as many original structures as possible.
One more hotel is in progress on Nevskiy pr, 89-91. They demolished historical buildings between Nevskiy pr and Goncharnaya str to free the area for this new hotel. Committee on State Control, Use and Protection of Historical and Cultural Landmarks has approved the demolition and the design project of new hotel (28 m height). This new high building will be higher that all the neighboring houses and will worsen the panorama of Nevskiy prospect.
In autumn 2006 they demolished some historical building located near the Nevskiy pr and Vosstaniya str. The house of charitable community of Znamenskoy Church (built in 1887, architect A. Ivanov), the set of buildings from the beginning of the 19 century (Nevskiy pr, 116, Vosstaniya str, 2, architects A. Gemilian, P. Gilev, V. Morgan; Nevskiy pr, 114, architect P. Pyilnev; courtyard fronts, architect K. Anderson). Stockmann company is going to construct mega shop centre there.
In 2000 the group of experts (lead expert Dr. Valery Lisovskiy, ex-head of StP department of the All-Russia’s Society for Protection of Culture and Art Monuments) recognized the following: a part of buildings (Nevskiy pr – Vosstaniya str) “is a historical, scientific, artistic and cultural value”; all the buildings were included into the list of valuable buildings.
Committee on State Control, Use and Protection of Historical and Cultural Landmarks’ resolution ¹ 8-102 from August 2004 excludes 35 buildings out of this list, thus a part of buildings (Nevskiy pr – Vosstaniya str) becomes not valuable again. Alexey Kovalev, the Deputy of Saint-Petersburg Parliament, brought an action against the resolution ¹ 8-102. In his action Kovalev mentioned that according to Cultural Department there must be very weighty reasons to exclude building out of the list of valuable buildings such as:
destruction as a result of act of God
irreparable loss after archaeological research
Besides in the latest resolution from August 2004 the technical condition is described as “medium”, not as “critical”.
In one of the interviews Vera Dementyeva explained her own understanding of the criteria whether building should be demolished or not. She said that building should be demolished if lost historical value or physical strength. It is interesting for us how any building recognized as historical valuable could lose its value.
Hearing is still in progress but before court gives its verdict the resolution works. Thus the whole block of historical buildings is demolished. They promises to reconstruct main fronts but the courtyard parts will be changed totally. Yury Zemcov (main architect) said that the height of mega shop will be “a little more” than the official limit. Let’s note that architect Zemcov was the author of hotel “Nevskiy Palace” also. The main made public reason of designers, architects and Committee on State Control, Use and Protection of Historical and Cultural Landmarks is that there were no town-planning limits when they took a decision about the project. However it is known that there was a conservation zone regime which forbids any new constructing.
Today Vera Dementyeva tells proudly that the house (Nevskiy pr, 114) won’t be demolished. But she doesn’t tell that the shop (instead of other demolished buildings) will be larger than the area of house ¹ 114 by 45000 sq.m. Useful area of reconstructed buildings will grow in 10 times. According to the project there will be located parking (12320 sq.m), business offices (19000 sq.m), shops (2420 sq.m), commercial centre (5200 sq.m), apartments (1090 sq.m), restaurant (950 sq.m), cafe (690 sq.m), relax centre (2000 sq.m), etc…
That is the architecture that will begin Nevskiy prospect in the near future.
The Smolniy Cathedral panorama
The newest buildings have already changed the panorama rather significantly. The elite house on Robespyera quay blocked the Cathedral view from the Liteiniy bridge, thus there is no visual connection between the Cathedral and Pirogovskaya and Petrovskaya quays now. Another house (Shpalernaya str, 60) blocked the view of the half of the Cathedral.
We have already mentioned how would be damaged the Smolniy Cathedral panorama if the skyscraper “Gazprom-City” would be built there, and we have already shown some figures performed with the help of math models.
There is another risk about the Cathedral panorama. Committee on State Control, Use and Protection of Historical and Cultural Landmarks has actually prepared an area for another elite house when excluded house located on Smolnogo str, 4 (b. Gradskaya hospice, 1866-1888, architect K. Sokolov). We think that new builder would try to use the area in maximum financial profit way, i.e. will try to construct another skyscraper here.
2. LOSS OF ORIGINALITY AND INTEGRITY, DESTRUCTION OF ORDINARY HISTORICAL BUILDINGS
Over the last 10 years, many blocks of the so-called “ordinary buildings” were lost in St. Petersburg. Some of the latest reports from this front: house No. 26 on Liteiny avenue was demolished to build a multifunctional shop and office center (this has
When the house No. 5/19 on Liteiny ave. was demolished, governor Matvienko promised “a public flogging” to the builder, a company called Adamant. Matvienko explained that the city government had only allowed Adamant to dismount floors in bad condition and to repair façades in an 1882 building (architect Tatsky) but not to bring it down completely. Although the demolished building was not a protected object of cultural heritage, it was located within the United Protected Area of Historical Monuments in the Centre of Saint Petersburg.
“It is an outrage that the house is demolished, and Adamant is to blame,” said Valentina Matvienko, “a special commission is investigating into this matter now. It will make a conclusion whether it is true that the house was in an emergency condition and could go down by itself at any moment, as the investor says. While the experts are making their decision, the State Architecture and Construction Monitoring Service has put a stop to any construction work on the site.”
However, it might be that this has become possible in the first place because the builder had plenty of reasons to believe that builders are allowed anything in this city: the latest years show hundreds of convincing examples of absolute impunity for investors who break the law when they build in the historical center, destroy old buildings, and bear no liability whatsoever.
Two more historical buildings, which have the status of newly discovered protection objects, are facing the threat of demolition for the sake of building a hotel, a business center, and an underground car park near the Ligovsky Prospect metro station, on the corner of Konstantin Zaslonov street and Voronezhskaya street. The developer is ZAO Telezhnaya 29, which the SIB company established especially for this project. The Deputy CEO of SIB, Valeriy Kotlov, has said in public that reconstruction of the historical buildings is “unfeasible”, and the investor will try to get permission to destroy them.
Unfortunately, it is the very top of the St. Petersburg government that sets the trend for such statements. Below is the opinion of vice-governor Yury Molchanov about the reconstruction methods used on the New Holland island, which has become known to the wide public through the internet:
“For a more active development of the New Holland island in St. Petersburg, its federal status should be lowered,” According to the Rosbalt information agency, this is what vice-governor Yury Molchanov said on Saturday at an outside meeting. In his opinion, it would be more feasible to demolish the old navy warehouses on the island and build them anew keeping the old façades only. Molchanov emphasized that the layout of these buildings is not convenient for modern life. According to the vice-governor, no project research has yet been done on the site despite all the official statements. “The documents we have are just romantic pictures and nothing else,” he said. ROSBALT 15.05.2004 15:52
In the end of December 2006, all the mass media publicized his other idea of demolishing everything in Apraksin Dvor for the sake of its “reconstruction.”
At the same time, in the latest years dozens of new buildings have appeared in the historical St. Petersburg that are out of tune with their environment. There has been new construction and demolition in all parts of the world heritage object including both the centre of the city and the suburbs.
The following factors contribute to the destruction of the city environment:
1. Demolition of allegedly “dilapidated” buildings including those having suffered from construction works in the neighborhood (Nevsky ave. 99 and 101, Michurinskaya st, Nevsky ave., Nevsky Palace hotel and two neighboring houses, several buildings on Bolshaya Morskaya st.; Moyka 11; buildings near the Moscow railway station on Ligovsky ave. (there is currently a pit there), etc.); when areas released in this way are built up, it is only the façade that is kept or “restored,” and in most cases a totally new house is built.
2. New buildings that contradict violently with the surrounding historical environment. As a result, the integrity of most architectural ensembles in the historical center including embankments has been lost.
To summarize all of the above, the following must be put on the list of such buildings (according to the list of the Committee on State Use and Protection of Monuments, KGIOP). Objects that were built earlier are also included.
1. 18 Bolshaya Moskovskaya Street;
2. 19 Vilensky Lane;
3. 37 Vyborgskaya Embankment;
4. 41 Vyborgskaya Embankment;
5. 13 Levashovsky Avenue;
6. 43/1 Lermontovsky Avenue, letter R, (the highest part of the Sovetskaya hotel);
7. 6 Ligovsky Avenue;
8. 2 Malaya Monetnaya Street, (currently under construction)
9. 16 Malookhtinsky Avenue, building 1 (new building)
10. 48-50—52 Moyka Embankment, 3 Kazanskaya Street (new construction)
11. 59 Fontanka Embankment;
12. 14 Pesochnaya Embankment (new building);
13. 34 Petrogradskaya Embankment, letter R;
14. 17 Pirogovskaya Embankment, building 4, letter A;
15. 17 Pirogovskaya Embankment, building 4;
16. 6-8 Robespierre Embankment (new building)
17. 2 Sennaya Square (2 Efimova Street), (PIK shopping center).
18. 2b Suvorovsky avenue;
19. 39 Tavricheskaya Street.;
20. Corner of Pirogovskaya Embankment and Finlyandsky avenue;
21. 5 Akademika Pavlova Street, letter A;
22. 5 Akademika Pavlova Street, letter B;
23. 22 Blokhina Street.;
24. 10 Vyazovaya Street;
25. 1 Grota Street (currently under construction);
26. 14 Dobrolyubova Street, letters B and R ;
27. 3 Efimova Street, letter S (Sennaya shopping center);
28. 4a Efimova Street (new building);
29. 5 Mayakovskogo Street (new building);
30. 24 Odoevskogo Street;
31. 26 Odoevskogo Street;
32. 4 Pochtamtskaya Street (built-on dome);
33. 3 Pravdy Street;
34. 47 Professora Popova Street (the top part of the Youth Palace);
35. Savushkina Street between Akademika Shimanskogo Street and Shishmarevsky Lane;
36. 5 Ushakovskaya Embankment;
37. 3 Furazhny Lane;
38. 60 Shpalernaya Street, letters D and I (new construction);
39. Sherbakov Lane, Vladimirskaya Square (currently under construction)
The following should be added:
40. “At the Rostral Columns” house block on Volkhovsky lane, which destroyed the view on Makarov Embankment from Petrogradskaya (two newly discovered monuments demolished);
41. Project of a 28-meter high hotel on Line 8 of the Basil Island (## 11-13).
42. New block of houses on the place of the demolished Preobrazhensky regiment quarters, a newly discovered monument (Radischev st. and Kirochnaya st.);
43. The Consulate General of Finland on Preobrazhenskaya square near the cathedral (a newly discovered monument demolished).
44. A building on the Fontanka Embankment between the former Ciniselli Circus and Mikhaylovsky Castle, which destroyed the view upon the castle from Fontanka.
45. A glass building on Kazanskaya st. adjoining the famous Voronikhin grille of the Kazan Cathedral (historical building demolished).
46. The new building of the Mariinsky theater (the First Pyatiletka House of Culture, a 20th century cultural monument, has been demolished; an old wall of Quarenghi’s Lithuanian Castle, a newly discovered monument, fell down allegedly by accident during the construction).
47. A skating rink building inside the Tavrichesky Garden.
48. A hotel being built on the Ostrovsky square in the Rossi ensemble.
49. Future buildings on New Holland – something like the new building of the Mariinsky Theater will appear as a result of an international contest.
3. The “infill construction” policy
Land is given away for construction everywhere without any control. According to the project of protected areas of monuments in the historical center of 1988, there were over 200 sites (gaps) specified in the protected area where new construction is allowed. In 2004, the government of St. Petersburg adopted a list of 300 new such sites instead of the old ones, which were either built up or in no demand by that time. Between 1988 and 2004, more and more lists of gaps appeared, and each new gap was allegedly reasoned by the city government decision of 1988 on the united protected area and gaps in it. As a result, the protected area became something like Swiss cheese. According to the new project of the protected area, most of the current protected area will become one big gap where anything can be built “upon expert decision” including “demolition of dilapidated buildings and buildings in emergency condition”. Until the end of 2005, land survey projects had not even been made when land was given away to builders. The conditions of building on the allotted land are written anew each time to meet the needs of a certain “investor” irregardless of even the situation in the same block, as we have no preset parameters for build-up and use of each specific sites (as it is done, for example, for historical parts of Stockholm) (unclear sentence)
For the existing historical environment, “infill construction” is dangerous first of all because the historical structure is broken up and made chaotic; a clear example of that is the new building on Vladimirskaya square, which was set with no consideration of the street and household borders; another danger is that cracks appear in foundations and walls when poling is put in. The second problem is that new buildings are nearly always architecture of no context.
When she was running for governor in 2003, Valentina Matviyenko promised the voters “to put an end to infill construction.” She did later issue an executive order on that matter (No. 23-rp of 22.12.2003), which put a one-year moratorium on infill construction; it was then explained that although the existing projects would be completed, no new projects would be allowed. However, just one month before announcing the moratorium, governor Matviyenko gave life to hundreds of new infill construction projects, earmarking new construction sites. In just one working day, November 11, 2003, the governor managed to sign over 200 documents, most of which allowed new construction or prolonged permissions for infill construction that had been issued by Vladimir Yakovlev administration.
4. Gaudy mega-projects that will destroy historical objects and distort old Petersburg.
4.1. ``New Holland''
In August 2006, the first stage of British architect Norman Foster's plan for New Holland began. The reconstruction has been going full speed since. Buildings with significant historical value are being destroyed. Despite the discovery of valuable artifacts by specialists from the Hermitage Museum and the Northwest Archeological Expedition, the Committee on State Control, Utilization and Protection of Historical and Cultural Landmarks, or CSCUPHCL, in its rush to approve the project, declared part of the island free of cultural significance.
Excavators have already destroyed a building that housed a 200-meter pool built in 1892. The value of the basin is not so much in its design, but in its purpose -- practically all ships and vessels built in that era were tested there. Destroyed along with the pool were various type of equipment used in those tests.
The building next door, now destroyed, once housed the great chemist Dmitry Mendeleyev's laboratory. Not far away, also gone, stood the former radio station of the Sea Joint Staff, from where the Baltic Fleet conducted broadcasts in 1917 and in which the inventor of radio, Alexander Popov, worked. The Bolshevik’s propaganda campaign against Kornilov’s uprising was conducted from the same building, as was the broadcast of that immortal phrase, «Everybody, everybody, everyody!»
All these historical treasures are being destroyed. Colin Amery and Viscount Norwich, English representatives of the World Monuments Fund (WMF), have said they ``regret the recent destruction of the radio station from where the Bolsheviks declared victory and and Dmitry Mendeleyev's laboratory. We support initiatives to create new buildings in St. Petersburg, but we emphasize that this city should keep its uniqueness if it wishes to remain the city that
Remarkably, among the protected areas of the city, according to CSCUPHCL, New Holland is designated the strictest classification, Security Zone 031, which forbids construction of new buildings. Now however, CSCUPHCL is trying to ignore its own regulations regarding the faux modern construction of the Palace of Festivals.
Opinion of art critic Mikhai Zolotonosov:
“An image is severe-romantic, beautiful emptiness, partly mysterious, unapproachable -- enhanced by its proximity to nature. The combination of ancient brick walls to trees and a grass coast of two channels and the Moika River has created a unique phenomenon. It's not just a set of 11 monuments of architecture, but a unique architectural ensemble-landscape in the center of `old Petersburg.'
That's what should have been preserved as a tribute to Petersburg. Instead, a multipurpose complex overwhelming the island with buildings and public places is being built. The result will be the same as present-day Sennaya Square, a historical area in the heart of the city now spoiled by eclecticism and overdevelopment.
Historical monuments, already boxed in by faux modern, freshly painted hotels, shops and restaurants will simply cease to exist. That is to say that formally they may be preserved under layers of signboards and paint, but they'll get such a makeover, that that it will be impossible to call them historical monuments. And the bridges -- seven, nine, 10 -- will destroy an exterior of the island itself. The island has to be separated from ``land'' by water, and with so many wide bridges, both pedestrian and motor, there's no island anymore.
In connection with this, I could refer to ``The Petersburg Preservation of Heritage Strategy'' that was recently legalized, which forbids new construction in protected areas, the building of garages of more than 1,000 cars, etc. But such a referral is useless since the monuments are protected only in words.''
Opinion of Mikhail Milchik, member of the federal and municipal councils for the preservation of cultural heritage and the deputy head of Spetzproectrestavratia:
“My basic complaint about the reconstruction of New Holland is about the terms of the competition. Initially, only the buildings on the state's protection list were required to be preserved. That point has been completely ``forgotten,'' that this unique complex is an ensemble where space plays no smaller role than individual constructions. Except for monuments of 18th and 19th century design – the well-known arch, three-ship wood warehouses, round prison, a smithy and ``ladle'' pool, in decent technical condition – there were expressive brick buildings of early 20th century design such as workshops and the laboratory-administrative building. On a wall of the last one there was a board in honor of an outstanding Russian shipbuilder, A.N. Krylov, where Russia's modern fleet was conceived. Alas, according to the terms of the competition, the entire front of the Admiralty Channel was allowed to be demolished.
The area allotted for the Palace of the Festivals under the terms of the competition was sharply overestimated. Settlement capacity of the main hall -- two thousand places. The Palace, considering the small size of the island, should have been half that size and occupy the area between the Admiralty Channel and the ladle, which even the united security zone of Leningrad certified as a lacuna. The Palace ``landed'' on the center of the island, an area never intended for building. But for some reason, the jury of the competition let it go.
Now, about functions. Three types of interiors were used in warehouses and were well kept: the oldest, from the 18th century, was open and intended for storing wood for shipbuilding in the vertical position; the two-storey constructions from the beginning of the 19th century that were transformed into military warehouses, and from the early 20th century the «wells» for lifting cargoes to the upper floors (including elevating mechanisms) with metal ladders like those found on military ships.
The use of warehouses exclusively for trade and hotels means that perfectly kept wooden designs in interiors will be completely destroyed. Meanwhile it could be possible to locate hotels, shops and museums here – such as the Naval and history of St. Petersburg museaum, galleries for contemporary art exhibitions – as architect Fabritskiy proposed in 1990s. That plan would attract tourists...
A building housing a forge – a monument of architecture – is being preserved, but it's almost completely covered by a roof of a palace and serves as a front entrance. Hence, spectators would have to pass through the whole island to get to the hall. What matters is that the front entrance to the island is planned on Kriukov Canal.
Some ideas of English architects are interesting: illumination of suits under the roof, without velux windows and without changing roof angles and the blocking of the prison round courtyard of; a chamber concert hall is supposed to be placed below a level of a courtyard.
However, the main thing is that the closed space with the open ladle in the center – the basic advantage of New Holland – will disappear. This doesn’t confuse the participants in the project, for they perceive old architecture as some kind of a frame, an addition to their own project. The architecture of Norman Foster is rather active, if to not to say aggressive. It's enough to notice that the transparent dome of the Palace of Festivals will tower above roofs of warehouses by at least 13 meters, and the ``ladle'' will be surrounded on three sides by open platforms for spectators to view water shows. Between a palace and the warehouse will be an absolutely narrow pass.
I have doubts of the technical character as well. Warehouses stand on wooden piles. They hold buildings until the level of subsoil water is constant. If the level on a course of construction will decrease, buildings can seriously suffer. The construction of an underground two-storey parking garage is planned. It is possible to imagine the volume and character of works which will take place right next to 18th century buildings ... Was it correct to separate architecture and engineering? And the transport scheme still remains undeveloped ...
However, I shall repeat once again: the main trouble with New Holland that I see is the aspiration to receive momentary feedback from it; that the conditions of the competition excluded the conclusions and recommendations of the historical and cultural study led by the Petersburg scientific research institute ``Spetzproektrestavratzia;'' that the Cultural Heritage Council only just now reviewed the project, when work has already advanced too far.
The main complaints should be addressed not to Norman Foster, but to the designer of the competition. In the documents for the competition, the island is considered regular territory, instead of a unified ensemble as well as a monument of architecture. There are no restrictions on height and there's no delineation between areas for empty space and development restrictions and for new construction.''
